HALLEY STEWART PUBLICATIONS I
THE SOCIAL TEACHING
OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Halley Stewart Publications I
THE SOCIAL TEACHING
OF THE
CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
by
ERNST TROELTSGH
TRANSLATED BY
OLIVE WYON
VOLUME TWO
LONDON: GEORGE ALLEN & UNWIN LTD
NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
FIRST PUBLISHED IN ENGLISH IN I931
All rights reserved
PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY
UNWIN BROTHERS LTD., WOKJNG
DEDICATED
IN DEEPEST GRATITUDE AND RESPECT
TO
THE EMINENT PHILOSOPHICAL FACULTY
AT GREIFSWALD
AND
TO THE EMINENT LAW FACULTY
AT BRESLAU
CONTENTS OF VOLUME TWO
CHAPTER III
PROTESTANTISM
1. The Sociological Problem of Protestantism^-
Protestantism as a new type of the sociological development of
Christian thought
Point of departure; originality of Luther; relation to class move-
ments of the period
Luther’s religious thought
Sociological consequences of these ideas
The new conception of the Church 477-
Conclusions drawn from this Conception:
(i) The absolute conception of Truth
(ii) The ministry of the Word as the means of organization
(iii) The Territorial Church system and the compulsory
supremacy of the Church
The Ethic of Compromise corresponding to the Church conception
The peculiar character of the Protestant ecclesiastical ethic: the
central position of the Decalogue; the dualism of a “personal”
and “official” morality
Retrospect and Forecast
2. Lutheranism
Church conception and the ecclesiastical organization of
Lutheranism
Unifying influence of the State Church conception upon Christian
Society
The Lutheran ethic
The Lutheran conception of Natural Law
The Sociological Fundamental Theory of Lutheranism
The Family
The State
Economic theory
The organization of Society and the “Callings” # \
Social Policy, Social Reform, and Philanthropy J
Connection between Lutheranism and the general cultural situation
in Germany and reflex action upon the latter
Significance of Lutheranism for the political and social situation
in Germany
PAGE
461
4^5
467
477
■494
494
501
5H
5i5
52i
523
528
540
544
547
554
561
569
575
456 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
PAGE
3. Calvinism
Calvinism surpasses Lutheranism. Distinction between primitive
Calvinism and Neo- Calvinism. Original development of Calvin-
ism out of Lutheranism 576
Special Religious and Ethical Characteristics of Primitive Calvinism: 579
(i) Doctrine of Predestination 581
(ii) Calvinistic Individualism 587
(iii) The Holy Community and Resemblances to the Anabaptists 590
(iv) The Calvinist Ethic. Asceticism. The idea of the “calling”.
The Natural Law of morals 602
(v) The Sociological Fundamental Theory. Equality and In-
equality. Christian Socialism 617
The Influence of the Cultural Situation in Geneva upon Primitive Calvinism 625
(i) The democratic-constitutional characteristics of Calvinism.
Conditions in Geneva. Beza’s doctrine of the State. The
Huguenot anti-monarchist doctrine of the State. The Scot-
tish doctrine of the State. Cromwell. Althusius. Grotius.
Locke. Hobbes. Pufendorf 628
(ii) The capitalistic element in the economic ethic of Calvinism.
Calvinism and Capitalism. Capitalism restricted by Christian
requirements. Calvinism reconciled to the modern economic-
order 641
(iii) Political Internationalism of Calvinism. The Problem of War.
The Policy of Intervention 650
Social Doctrines peculiar to Calvinism: 652
Conception of the Church, of Society, and of the Family
The Transition to Neo-Calvinism in the development of the Free
Churches and of Pietism as the result of applying the standards
of the Holy Community to great civilized nations 656
The Free Churches
(i) The Brownists and Barrowists 661
(ii) Congregationalism 663
(iii) Independency in England 666
(iv) Penetration of the Free Church principle into genuine
Calvinism 670
(v) Religious Toleration 671
(vi) Natural Law and Liberal character of Free Church Neo-
Calvinism 673
CONTENTS
457
PAGE
Puritanism and Pietism 677
(i) Puritanism in England 678
(ii) “Precisianism” in the Netherlands 682
(iii) Pietism on the Lower Rhine and in Switzerland 686
The Ethic of Neo-Calvinism and its fusion with the ethic of the
bourgeois sect-type. The rise of the collective group of Ascetic
Protestantism as the result of this fusion 688
The Sect-type and Mysticism within Protestantism
The complementary movement of the sects and of mysticism
alongside of the Protestant Territorial Church system, and the
original inclusion of both these elements in the Reformation
world of thought 691
The Baptist Movement and the Protestant Sects 694
(i) Connection between the Baptist movement and the Reformers 694
(ii) Development of the sect-motive within the organized Baptist
movement as an independent element. General charac-
teristics of the Baptist movement 695
(iii) Origin of the Baptist movement 696
(iv) Difference in the position accorded to the sect-idea by
Catholicism and by Protestantism 700
(v) Baptists at Zurich and first extension of the movement 703
(vi) Mennonites 705
(vii) English Baptists and the rise of the General Baptists 706
(viii) The radical Baptists and the English Revolution 710
(ix) The Levellers 710
(x) The Diggers 7 1 1
(xi) The Millennarians 712
(xii) Pietism 714
(xiii) The Moravians 719
(xiv) The Methodists 72 1
(xv) The Labadists 724
(xvi) Modern sects 725
(xvii) Christian Socialism 726
(xviii) Tolstoi 728
Mysticism and Spiritual Idealism 729
(i) The religious nature of Mysticism in general 730
(ii) Mysticism in the New Testament 732
458 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
PAGE
(iii) Mysticism based on religious philosophy 734
(iv) “Spiritual Religion” ( Spiritualismus ) 738
(v) Protestant “Spiritual Religion” 740
(vi) Difference between this “Spiritual Religion” and the Baptist
movement 742
(vii) Sociological character of “Spiritual Religion” 745
(viii) Effects of Dogma 746
(ix) The ethic of “Spiritual Religion” 752
(x) Thomas Miinzer 754
(xi) Karlstadt 755
(xii) Schwenkfeld 756
(xiii) Sebastian Franck 760
(xiv) Castellio 762
(xv) Coornheert 764
(xvi) The Collegiants 766
(xvii) “Spiritual” Theologians among the Baptists 767
(xviii) Natural Philosophers 769
(xix) David Joris 770
(xx) Hendrik Niclaes 772
(xxi) Labadie 773
(xxii) Mysticism in the Netherlands in the seventeenth century 773
(xxiii) Mysticism in England in the seventeenth century 776
(xxiv) The Quakers 780
(xxv) Methodism and Pietism 784
(xxvi) The Moravian Church 788
(xxvii) The modern religious philosophy of Idealism 791
(xxviii) The Romantic Movement 793
(xxix) Modern Theology 796
(xxx) Sociological results of modern “Spiritual Religion” 797
The social doctrines of Mysticism and of “Spiritual Religion” 800
The social doctrines of the aggressive sect 802
The non-aggressive sect and its fusion with Neo-Calvinism ; Ascetic
Protestantism once more 805
«
The Sociological Fundamental Theory of Ascetic Protestantism 807
(ii) The Sex Ethic 809
(ii) The Political Ethic 810
(iii) The Economic Ethic 812
CONTENTS
459
PAGE
The position of Ascetic Protestantism in the history of the Christian
ethic 815
Mutual influence of general civilization on the groups which have
been described 8 1 6
Significance of Ascetic Protestantism at the present day 818
CONCLUSION
Developments in Christian social doctrine since the eighteenth
century 99 1
Results:
(i) The three chief types of the sociological development of the
Christian idea 993
(ii) Dogma and theology conditioned by sociological factors 994
(iii) Conception of Truth and Religious Toleration 997
(iv) History of the development of the Christian ethic 999
(v) Significance of the Marxist method for Theology 1002
(vi) The permanent ethical content of Christianity 1004
(vii) The most suitable form of organization for Christian
religious life at the present time 1006
(viii) Christianity and the modern social problem 1010
CHAPTER III
PROTESTANTISM
i. THE SOCIOLOGICAL PROBLEM OF PROTESTANTISM
Protestantism: A New Sociological Type
Mediaeval Christianity produced two great classic types of
social doctrine: first, the relative type of the idea of Christian
Society which is represented by Thomism; and, secondly, the
radical idea of Christian Society which was evolved by the sects.
The position of the first type may be stated thus : the Church,
which is regarded as a universal institution, endowed with abso-
lute authoritative truth and the sacramental miraculous power
of grace and redemption, takes up into its own life the secular
institutions, groups, and values which have arisen out of the
relative Natural Law, and are adapted to the conditions of the
fallen state ; the whole of the secular life, therefore, is summed up
under the conception of a natural stage in human life, which
prepares the way for the higher supernatural stage, for the ethic
of grace and miracle, for the spiritual and hierarchical world-
organization.
The position of the second type may be thus summarized : the
religious community has evolved its social ideal purely from the
Gospel and from the Law of Christ; according to this type of
thought the Christian character and holiness of this ideal should
be proved by the unity reigning within the group and by the
practical behaviour of the individual members, and not by
objective institutional guarantees. Therefore, either it does not
recognize the institutions, groups, and values which exist outside
of Christianity at all, or in a quietly tolerant spirit of detach-
ment from the world it avoids them, or under the influence of
an “enthusiastic” eschatology it attacks these institutions and
replaces them by a purely Christian order of society.
In each instance the nature of the Christian fellowship itself is
conceived from a different point of view ; in the first instance it is
conceived as an institution, not dependent on individualism,
possessing a depositum of absolute truths and wonderful,, civilizing
sacramental powers; in the second instance it is conceived as
a society whose life is constantly renewed by the deliberate
allegiance and personal work of its individual members. This is
the reason why the champions of the “Church” theory were able
to discard the ideal of a strict Christian perfection, or at least to
462 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Jijnit it to a particular group, that is, to monasticism; this also*
explains why the supporters of the “sect” theory upheld the ideal
of Christian perfection as binding on all Christians alike.
Further, in both instances the Christian fundamental ideas of
sin and grace are interpreted in a different sense. In the case of the
Church-type, its doctrine of sin facilitated the acceptance of the
existing secular social order, whose merely relative non-Christian
character is regarded as the result of sin ; this social order, there-
fore, must be frankly accepted and tolerated. At the same time
“grace” is regarded as the miraculous power which purifies these
institutions, uses them as the basis of a higher structure, and sub-
ordinates them to a universal central authority. This authority is
conceived in its essence as a wonderful supreme authority,
transcending Nature, even pure and unfallen Nature; as super-
nature it is superimposed upon Nature in the graded structure
of the entelechies of the universe.
In the case of the sect-type, the existing institutions, groups, and
values of the secular life are equally explained by the fact of sin ;
this, however, does not mean that they are inevitable, and must
simply be accepted ; on the contrary, the supporters of this theory
use this fact as an argument for the radical rejection by Christians
of the secular life and all its works, and as a challenge to create
a social order which is based purely upon the principles of the
Gospel. According to this theory, grace means the “calling and
election” which separates the Christian from the life of this present
world, and inspires the pure gospel ethic with knowledge and
power (an ethic which vindicates itself by its subjective influence
and not by its institutional system) ; “grace” also means the hope
that the Christian Church will be finally vindicated at the great
reversal of all secular values in the Last Judgment. Grace is not a
superstructure erected upon the basis of Nature — whether sinful
or innocent — which has to be accepted, but it is identified with
the complete, pure, ideal nature of the Primitive State. So far as
fallen humanity is concerned, grace does not mean the purifica-
tion of nature and the ascent to supernature, rather it means pure
and radical hostility to the whole principle of sin, expressed in a
genuine Christian spirit, and in the Christian moral law.
This theory is connected with a whole series of further distinc-
tions, which belong to the subtler realm of religious psychology
and to theological thought. Christology, in particular, was
obviously connected with the idea of the Church as a “fellowship”
which prevailed at that time, in so far as the “Church” regarded
Christ as the Founder of the Church and the Founder of the
PROTESTANTISM 463
objective treasury of grace and of salvation ; whereas the
regarded Him as the Law-giver, the Divine example, the stimu-
lating energy, the presence of the supra-historical Exalted Christ,
the source of all immediate influence and activity. All this,
however, really belongs to the history of doctrine. For our present
subject it is vital to remember that the idea of the Church as an
objective institution, and as a voluntary society, contains a funda-
mental sociological distinction. This distinction leads to a corre-
sponding distinction in the sphere of ethics : on the one hand, the
Christian ethic is supplemented by the natural ethic, and is thus
enabled to dominate the masses ; while on the other, this idea of
nature as the “complement 9 5 of grace is rejected, and the influence
of this group is therefore confined to small circles of passive
resisters or revolutionaries. The Church-type accepted a natural
ethic whose standards differ greatly from those of Christianity;
the sect- type rejected this idea entirely. Those who regarded the
Church as an objective institution looked upon “Nature” as
something which, though different from grace, was yet capable of
being moulded by it ; whereas those to whom the Church was a
voluntary society regarded “genuine Nature” as something
which was identical with grace, while they rejected “fallen
Nature” altogether as something which could not possibly be
harmonized with grace at all.
This distinction can be traced right back to Primitive Christi-
anity and the Early Church. We see it in embryo in the contrast
between the love-communism of the local Church in Jerusalem
and the conservative adjustment to the existing social order pro-
claimed by Paul. The Church only reached her full development,
however, when, in the days of Constantine, she became a State
Church. Only then was it possible for her to realize her universal
and absolute unity and supremacy, which, during the time of the
Holy Roman Empire, then enabled her to subdue the State itself
to the unity which had been gained with the help of the State;
this meant that the Church was also able to assert her authority
over the whole of the non-religious civilization as well. Since,
however, it was only the Middle Ages which thus created a
Christian unity of civilization, so also it was only the Middle
Ages which produced definitely and clearly the complementary
movement of the sect. At this point the social doctrines of Latin
Christianity ceased to develop. Henceforth it became clear that
Christian social doctrine could only produce further develop-
ments if it were to receive a fresh infusion of new life. Only
an inward change, and a further development within Christian
464 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
thought itself, could pave the way for new ideals in the Christian
doctrine of Society.
It is well known that a new development of this kind did take
place in the critical period of the later Middle Ages, and that
with the rise of Protestantism it succeeded in coming out into the
open at the Reformation. At the same time, in various directions,
both positively and negatively, the Reformation was restricted by
the forces which had already been developed during this crisis.
More than two hundred years separated the Reformation from
Thomism, which was the classic expression of the mediaeval spirit,
meanwhile opposition of various kinds had developed, as well as
development of the attempts at adaptation to its ideals. The spirit
of opposition to Thomism was expressed, in the main, in three
ways: (a) in the development of the sect-type, which had an
increasing influence; ( b ) in mysticism, which fostered a radical
religious individualism, preoccupied with the endeavour to free
itself from the shackles of scholasticism and ecclesiasticism ;
(c) in the critical self-destruction of the Thomist system in the late
mediaeval theological school of thought, in Nominalism, or rather,
to be more exact, in Occamism. Nominalism, in particular, had
an important influence on the Reformation. This philosophy
severed the connection between Reason and Revelation, destroyed
the idea of an ascent from Nature to Supernature and the care-
fully graded theory of the connatural and supernatural end for
which humanity has been created. It intensified psychological
self analysis by its appeal to experience and its emphasis on
the doctrine that “the individual is the real” ; it also emphasized
the positive nature of the Divine Will and altered the theory of the
sacraments. According to Nominalism the sacraments do not
convey a supernatural life, but they impart the righteousness which
belongs to human nature by right, but which had been lost by sin.
Otherwise, however, this school of thought still retained the funda-
mental idea of the universal dominion of the Church — peculiar
to Catholicism (in this particular it discarded the elements
peculiar to Occam and the Conciliar theologians) — and the idea
of the Christian unity of civilization ; the moral Law of Nature
was still recognized, alongside of the positive Divine order, which
was now c far more strongly emphasized. By means of treaties
between the different States and the Church, the ancient
ecclesiastical system was once more secured, both legally and
doctrinally, but both in doctrine and in ethics much uncertainty
remained, and under the surface a spirit of hostility towards the
Church was widespread. The general effect of Nominalism was to
PROTESTANTISM
465
dissolve the unity created by Thomism between dogma and philo-
sophy, between a natural and a supernatural ethic, between Natural
Law and the positive Divine decrees. This philosophy reflected the
prevailing disharmony between the life of the Church and the life
of the world; by laying increased emphasis upon the Divine
authority, however, it maintained the old ecclesiastical idea of
unity; in other directions it provided a safety-valve for reason
and the natural powers in the dispositions for grace, in the co-
operation of free-will. Luther himself was a product of this school
of thought; Thomism was already a matter of ancient history.
It was against it that Luther first directed his polemic; yet its
way of formulating problems, its dualistic and authoritative habit
of mind, its irrationalism towards philosophy, and its psychology
of inner experience, also formed the primary positive assumptions
of Luther’s most fundamental ideas. These ideas, however, are
still going through a process of elucidation, and they do not
belong to our subject. For us the main point of interest is the result
of these ideas, and the new religious idea of the Reformation . 1973
This, then, is our problem : in what did this change of Christian
thought consist? What were the new religious ideas, and what
were their sociological results?
Although the forces which converged in the Reformation and
in Protestantism were very varied, and although they gave rise
to a rich development of movements and personalities, all this
many-sided development was, in the last resort, based upon
Luther’s fundamental principles. These principles were the
absolute standard, doctrinally, for all these groups, even though
later on many of them may have developed along very different
lines. The Humanistic groups alone were independent of Luther,
and for that reason also they speedily lost their significance, so
far as he was concerned, at least for the next few centuries ; only on
the scientific and scholastic side did they make a contribution to
Protestantism, as well as to renewed Catholicism.
Luther and the Protestant Ethic
Thus our fundamental concern is with Luther’s religious ideas,
and with the sociological results to which they gave rise.
At this point, however, we must emphasize the fact th^t although
Luther’s religious ideas were based upon an inward change in the
whole situation which covered a century, they were still highly
original and personal, and, above all, they arose simply out of
the inner development of religious thought itself. Luther’s religious
187a Seep. 821.
B
vol. n.
466 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
ideas were not due to the reflex action of social, or even of eco-
nomic, changes; they were based essentially and independently
upon the religious idea, which alone gave rise to the social, eco-
nomic, and political consequences. In order to carry out the
religious idea in practice, and to make it victorious, in questions
of practical organization, social, economic, and political causes
did, it is true, play a very important part; but they had
nothing whatever to do with the fundamental question of origin.
So far as this was concerned the predominant and primary cause
was the religious idea, pure and simple. At least, only very indirectly
can we here discern certain traces of the influence of social, eco-
nomic, and political causes. That is to say : the theories proclaimed
by the Nominalism of later Scholasticism and the mysticism of
the pre-Reformation opposition parties, were doubtless to some
extent connected with the social changes which took place during
the later Middle Ages. The whole tendency to emphasize the
value of personal religious experience which this movement
expressed, and the severance of the religious interest from the
secular and political interest, was a result of the general situation,
of the city-civilization, of the growing independence of national
States, and of economic interests. Nevertheless, this influence was
only indirect. It only cleared the ground for the new ideas which
arose out of the intensely personal struggle and labours of the
Monk of Erfurt and Wittenberg, and it penetrated them with the
influence of an atmosphere in which a profound religious spiritu-
ality was combined with an impulse towards activity and order.
That, however, was the atmosphere of the German city-civiliza-
tion of that period. This phenomenon, as is always the case at the
great turning-points of history, was due to a combination of very
different causes, originally entirely independent of each other ; only
a doctrinaire fanaticism would try to reduce these causes to one.
In this instance the religious idea was clearly the primary and the
dominant impulse. For that very reason it is impossible to con-
nect the Reformation world of thought with any particular social
class. These ideas seized the imagination of peasants and demo-
cratic artisans, of the lesser nobles who were fighting for their
very existence, and of the greater nobles who belonged to the
class of gr^at land-owners and princes, of city magistrates, guilds,
and the proletariat of the towns. At the outset the Reformation
was entirely free from social distinctions. If, however, it is claimed,
and in a certain sense rightly, that upon the whole its tendency
was bourgeois (especially as compared with the aristocratic
Church of the early mediaeval period, and also with the sects,
PROTESTANTISM
467
which were steeped in democratic and proletarian ideas), the
reason for this can only lie in that indirect connection to which
we have just alluded. This, again, was due to the fact (which it
is not difficult to understand psychologically) that the growth of
intellectual and spiritual individualism among large masses of
people is invariably connected with the formation of cities ; within
the city population, however, the Reformation — which from purely
religious reasons was strongly conservative in temper — united
with the bourgeois class, while, for the most part, the proletariat
adhered to the more radical Protestant sect-type. It was only the
later practical turn of events which constrained the Reformation
to link its fortunes with those of the civil authorities, who could
guarantee the preservation of order, that is, with the territorial
princes ; but this did not alter its fundamentally bourgeois charac-
ter. This whole development, however, was a very complicated
affair, which cannot now be clearly and directly determined. The
actual tendency, which was fostered by the religious emphasis upon
the value of the individual, arose out of Luther’s own inner
struggles . 198 What, then, was his religious position, which forms
the basis of the sociological development of Protestantism?
Theology of Luther
It is customary to describe Protestantism as the revival of the
Pauline and Augustinian religion of grace, in contrast to the
Catholic religion of law. In the main this is true, but it needs a
good deal of clear explanation and expansion. For in this renewed
emphasis upon the Pauline and Augustinian doctrine of grace,
the heart of the matter does not lie so much in the reassertion of
‘‘Grace” against “Law”, as in the new conception of grace itself.
The emphasis upon free grace and the exclusion of free-will was,
however, directed immediately only against the dominant doc-
trine of later scholasticism, which was prevalent in Luther’s day
and which he outgrew. But this emphasis on “free grace” did not
constitute an attack upon Catholicism in general . 199 To Catholi-
cism as a whole Luther’s opposition was far more deep-seated.
Catholicism, too, was a religion of grace, but its view of grace was
that of sacramental grace, of supernature, of a higher, mystical,
•
1M See p. 821.
199 This is strongly emphasized by Krogh-Tonningh: Der Letzte Scholastiker , 7904,
by whom he means the Thomist and Dutch Carthusian Dionysius. The con-
trast, however, does not lie in the polemic against Nominalist semi-Pelagianism,
but in the idea of grace which is also opposed to St. Thomas and his ideas of
predestination. %
468 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
and miraculous power, imparted by the hierarchy, entrusted
to the Church, which has a double effect : the forgiveness of sins
and the mystical elevation of humanity.
The idea of law was easily combined with this idea of grace.
For, if the ethical character of grace were to be preserved, it had
to be prepared for by ethical examination and earnest aspirations
after holiness, both of which required a legal standard; for the
same reason it had to be proved by good works, which again
require a legal standard, and which without harm could be
thought into the framework of the conception of Law, although it
was still the power of imparted grace, which, at bottom, with the
release of the natural energies of man, alone produced good works
and merits. Luther’s new idea was therefore not merely the general
re-emphasis upon grace, which makes a clean sweep of all com-
promise with legalism, but beyond that, it gave a new meaning to
the idea of grace itself.
On the other hand, however, neither Luther nor Protestantism
in general ever really removed the idea of Law from its central
position. The Law remained as a stimulus to repentance, and as
the pre-supposition of faith and the Gospel of grace. The Law
remained as the most direct and primal expression of the Divine
Will and Being, which only required a joyful and willing obedience
in a spirit of love and confidence, but which precisely on that
account required that the Law should be fulfilled in a complete
and spiritual way. The Law remained as the pre-supposition for
the Redemptive Work of Christ, who in His Death annihilated the
Law, and only then made men free of the order of grace. Finally,
the Law remained, although in a rather anomalous position, as
the rule of life in the state of grace, only now severed from the
idea of merit and of the achievement of salvation, because the
grace on which salvation is founded does not consist in “merits”
and “good works”, but in a transformed personality, in principle
already wholly united with God.
Thus, from this point of view also, it is clear that the new element
in Protestant theology was not the overcoming of the conception
of Law in itself, but the special content of the conception of grace,
which gives to the Law a different meaning and position from
that which it has in the Catholic idea of grace. Now the essential
element in this new conception of grace is this : that grace is no
longer a mystical miraculous substance, to be imparted through
the sacraments, but a Divine temper of faith, conviction, spirit,
knowledge, and trust which is to be appropriated ; in the Gospel
and in the Love and Spirit of Christ towards mankind it can be
PROTESTANTISM
469
discerned as the loving will of God which brings with it the forgive-
ness of sins . 200 Religion thus steps out of the material substantial
sphere, which was merely accompanied by thought and feeling,
and enters into the intellectual, psychological, spiritual sphere.
This does not mean that it ceases to be a miracle. But the miracle
now consists in the fact that man in his weakness, rebellion, despair,
and impurity can grasp such an idea from the Gospel; it is so
entirely beyond the reach of his natural powers, and the religious
idea of redemption is so far removed from the natural intellectual
sphere, that only through the miracle of predestination can it come
to pass. It is an inner miracle of faith in the Gospel and in Christ,
not an interior-external miracle of the hierarchical-sacramental
impartation of grace, which produces the power to do good works
and to acquire merit. Moreover, it is not an idea that can be
altered and changed at will, but a knowledge which is offered
with the absolute certainty of revelation, which starts from the
picture of the incarnate, suffering, and risen Son of God, and
possesses in the Bible an absolute, wonderful, and authentic
representation of this picture of Christ, even though, in detail, the
Bible is not free from all kinds of human imperfections. In Protes-
tantism, therefore, the heart of religion consists in the spirit of faith
which is thus effected by the “Word 55 , just as for Catholicism it
consists in priesthood and sacrament, in obedience and in mystic-
ism. Religion is now a matter of faith and conviction, instead of
one which is bound up with a hierarchical-sacramental system.
The two Protestant sacraments which are retained are special
methods of representing the Gospel ; their spiritual influence does
not exceed that of the influence of the Word of God in the Scrip-
tures; hence, in the Catholic sense, they are no longer sacra-
ments . 201
Now, however, this fundamental position contains, directly and
indirectly, further implications.
The first result is the reduction of the whole of religion to that
which alone can be an object of faith and trust, that is, to that
idea of God — evolved from the apostolic picture of Christ — which
represents Him as a gracious Will, holy, forgiving sins, and thus
leading men upwards into a higher life. All that needs to be
added to this idea is that which will bring assurance to the sinner,
namely, the knowledge of the Divine Revelation and condescen-
sion in the Incarnate Son of God or the Logos. Further, the
important element in this view of Christ is not the dim mysterious
essence of His being, but the assurance of His Love which is
200 See p. 823. 201 See p. # 824.
470 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
conveyed by His self-abasement in the Incarnation, by His
sufferings, and by His kindness — whereby sinful man can know
for a fact that God forgives sins.
This constitutes an immense simplification in doctrine, and a
new method of basing doctrine upon its conscious power to
awaken faith and trust. The unlimited authority of the apostolic
picture of Christ, which guarantees all this, is taken for granted,
as well as the miraculous nature of the Bible. The problem is not,
how can this be proved? but, how can one gain this personal
assurance? Surely this certainty is only possible through the
predestinarian miraculous influence of the God who Himself
creates faith. In every impulse towards trust the believer may
feel something of the miraculous saving power of God.
The second result of Luther’s teaching was that of religious
individualism, that inwardness of communion with God which is
independent of man or of a priesthood. Thus the whole idea of
mediation through a hierarchy, and through sacramental grace,
is swept away. This leads to the doctrine of the priesthood of all
believers, and to lay religion, to the renewal of the primitive
Christian independence and autonomy of the knowledge of God
effected by “the Spirit”. At this point Luther came into touch
with the corresponding tendencies in the sect-movement, which
were also derived from the Bible. All that was actually discarded,
however, was the idea of sacerdotal mediation ; mediation through
the Word, that is, through the Bible (and, since this is essentially
a witness to Christ, through the Scriptural picture of Christ) is
emphasized all the more strongly. Only thus can God be known.
Only thus does He reveal Himself as the God of Grace; every-
where else, outside of Christ, He appears as the God of the awful
metaphysical riddle and of the terror of the Law. Trust in Christ
alone is genuine trust in God. Only through contact with Him
does the soul enter into communion with God. Since, then, this
picture of Christ is incarnated in the Bible, which is the work of
God, the Bible or “the Word” is the only real means by which
a personal relationship with God is mediated ; this idea totally
excludes every kind of “direct” mysticism, which aims at union
with God apart from Christ. This Bible, however, with its message
of Christ, fprms the centre of the Church, which God has founded
through Christ as the fellowship of believers which ought to result
from the preaching of the Word. For this fellowship He has also
established the ministry of the Word, or the preaching of the
message of Christ, as the permanent objective foundation and
mediation of salvation. All that is indifferent and left to human
PROTESTANTISM
47i
choice is the method of calling to this ministry of the Word, and
the technical-juridical details of organization. All that is needed
is regular order and a proper training for one’s calling, in order
to exclude self-will and mistakes due to lack of knowledge . 202
The third conclusion to which this fundamental position leads
is the principle of a pure spiritual ethic. If the whole value of
man consists in a right attitude of faith and trust towards God in
the Word, then this general spirit also forms the basis of the stan-
dard for the ethical consequences to which it gives rise. Hence-
forth there is no ecclesiastical, authoritative, moral law; the
Church does not shoulder the responsibility of the individual ; the
only rule for conduct is the impulse of the individual conscience.
“Good works” exist no longer; all that matters is the general
spirit and attitude of the individual. No longer can one reckon
in terms of “merits” or “demerits” ; everything hinges on whether
the new life is checked and hindered or allowed to develop freely.
The system of future rewards and punishments has disappeared,
and all that remains is the blessedness of the new creation, out of
which all that is good will arise spontaneously. At the same time
it was, of course, taken for granted that the standard of this
spiritual ethic was still the law of the Decalogue and of the New
Testament, since, as before, both agree with the natural moral
law and therefore constitute the formula of the natural moral
impulse — which merely became a “revealed” formula through
those statements of Scripture. Those demands which were stabil-
ized in the Decalogue, and which also formed part of the natural
consciousness, only needed to be filled with the religious spirit
which issues from faith in order to signify the good as presented
by Christianity. It is therefore evident that this equation of the
Decalogue and the Natural Law and the Christian Law, which
is here taken for granted and continued, means the assimilation
of the intra-mundane ethic into the Christian ethic, just as it had
been assimilated previously in the whole of the patristic and
mediaeval ethic . 203
202 On this point cf. Herrmann: Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott 5 , 1908. Here,
however, the Lutheran Christology has been greatly modernized, and the
significance of the sacraments, in particular that of the Real Presence in the
Eucharist, has been very much modified. We only get a true picture when
we add to this the Incarnational Christology and the objective sacramental
doctrine.
203 On this point cf. Gottschick: Ethik , 1906. Here the motives and the spirit of
the Lutheran ethic are excellently explained; one misses here, however, as
everywhere else, a detailed treatment of Luther’s conception of the content
of the Christian moral law, of which more anon. t
472 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
This spiritual ethic (or ethic of disposition) leads to the accep-
tance of the world, to the disuse of monastic asceticism, to the new
meaning given to the idea of vocation or “the calling”. The
religious individualism of the religion of faith, which does not
mean the acceptance of a certain number of authoritative ecclesi-
astical dogmas, but simply a spirit of whole-hearted conviction,
also affects the ethical temper. Everywhere this ethical temper is
a whole, and therefore in principle it is everywhere the same, in
spite of various ways of expression. This means that the ideal of
perfection is the same for all alike ; hence it does away with the
naive position of Catholicism which takes for granted the various
degrees, grades, and ranks of perfection. It also discards all the
works of supererogation and vicarious oblations which this idea
involved. Above all, the Protestant ideal of perfection discards
the whole idea of the monastic state as a false ideal of some
special higher perfection. But this perfection, which is the same
for all, is still not the rigorism of the Christian law, as in the
sect; rather it means the spiritual equality, in principle created
by the blessedness of forgiveness, from which the “doing” of the
“new creature” issues freely.
The religion of faith which denies the sacramental grace of
Supernature also tends in the same direction. There is no longer
any room for the conception of “Supernature” at all; the whole
idea of a graduated system, leading from Nature up to Super-
nature, from secular morality to that which is spiritual and
supernatural, has faded away. Monasticism in any form only
appears to be a special condition of moral behaviour, man-made,
which flees from the natural conditions given by God; and by
creating artificial conditions appears to set itself heavier tasks,
although in reality it renders it easier for a Christian to overcome
the world. The real problem, however, is to overcome the world
wherever we find it, and in the midst of the life of the world to
free our hearts from the world and to live in a spirit of detach-
ment. There is no longer any room for self-chosen spheres of action,
for forms of fellowship alongside of the life of the world, which
claim to rise above it. It is precisely in the spirit of mutual service
within the life of the world that Christian love is demonstrated.
This also throws a fresh light on the system of vocational organ-
izations, which, on the whole, Protestantism also regards as
derived from the Natural Law. This system is no longer regarded
as the organization of Natural Law in the lower sphere, above
which rises the structure of the Church and of the mystical
fellowship of love, but it is the sphere appointed by God for all,
PROTESTANTISM
473
which includes the whole of Christian behaviour, in which each
man must accept his own calling as the life-task assigned to him
by God, and the contribution desired from him for the purpose
of forming the Christian unity of love.
The main types of “calling”, therefore — such as the calling of a
house-father, or of marriage, the calling to be a paternal ruler, or
to the exercise of authority in general — are held to have been
specially instituted by God Himself. This idea does not contradict
the other idea, that is, that these callings are equally derived from
Natural Law; it is merely a special Divine confirmation of the most
important “callings” appointed by Him . 204 Thus the previous
conceptions of ministerium and officium are replaced by that of
vocation this means that the whole system of callings is not a
product of the lower sphere of Nature, a sphere which still has to
be transcended, but that, like the natural sphere itself, it is a
direct and immediate institution of God . 2043 It proceeds directly
from Him, not indirectly from Nature, which is quite distinct
from Him. This, however, is a new conception of Nature, as an
inward and essential union between God and Nature, in which
Nature is regarded as an immediate decree of His essential Will,
and not as a lower degree of His self-emptying. To put it briefly :
this system of vocational organization is a stable class-system of a
patriarchal kind, fixed by Divine appointment in the Old Testa-
ment and by the Law of Nature, to which each individual
belongs, in permanent categories, usually receiving at birth his
assigned calling. Further, we must not forget that this immediate
Divine character of Nature is due to a simple, positive decree
of the Will of God, which a Christian must accept in a spirit
of humble obedience without any attempt at understanding it ;
there is, however, no real inner essential connection between God
and Nature; this is not asserted, nor is it felt to be so. Further,
Nature has been so deeply corrupted by the Fall that not merely
the present nature of man, but Nature in general, only reveals
God in exceptional circumstances; on the whole it reveals far
more the wickedness and cunning of the corruption of the Devil,
and the misery which is the punishment of sin. Thus this ethic of
vocation within the life of the world certainly means an accep-
204 See p. 824.
204a In order to understand the distinction between these two kindb of termin-
ology we need to realize that the word officium was the official Latin term for
“guild” (Z un ft)> von Oncken: Geschichte der Naturalokonomie , /, p. 112. Officium
means the natural organization, vokatio means at the same time the Divine
appointment which it contains; the latter, however, is much more strongly
emphasized by S.
474 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
tance of the world, but this acceptance is an act of obedience and
surrender rather than one of joy in God’s world ; the idea of joy
in the life of this present world because God made it, only appears
now and again. At bottom, the acceptance of the world does not
cease to be asceticism, that is, denial of the world, only it is a
different kind of asceticism from the heroic asceticism of the
Church, and it also differs from the legalistic detachment from
the world practised by the sects. It is an asceticism which is in the
world, yet not of it, which conquers the spirit of the world without
fleeing from it; it means the practice of self-denial within one’s
calling, which is regarded as a service to the whole community ;
it means the obedience which remains where it is set, and there
overcomes the “natural man” and the Devil . 205 As we proceed
we shall often have to deal with the tension and difficulty which
this acceptance of the world involves, an acceptance which far
transcends the Catholic position and which is of great significance
for the social philosophy of Protestantism.
Ultimately, of course, more or less consciously, behind all this
there are new conceptions of the fundamental ideas of religion:
of God, the world, and man. We cannot here pursue this general
question any farther 206 ; all we can do is to single out certain
important points which are relevant to the subject of this
book.
In the doctrine of Man the influence of the new ideas appears
most clearly in the doctrine of the Primitive State. Here the idea
of an ascent from natural to supernatural perfection has disap-
peared. In its stead we find the theory that the perfection of the
Primitive State consisted in a spirit of complete and filial trust in
God as an inherent element in the essential nature of man. Sin,
therefore, is the destruction of human nature, and redemption
is the restoration of human nature to full trust in God within the
natural order of life. Here the new conception of the relation
between God and man is perfectly clear.
So far as the conception of the world is concerned, the natural
consequence is the disappearance of the gradation idea. It dis-
appears not only in ethics, and in the doctrine of redemption, but
in the whole conception of the world itself. Matter and Nature do
205 On this point cf. Karl Eger: Die Anschauungen Luthers vom Beruf> igoo, and
Max Weber: Der Geist des Kapitalismus und die protestantische Ethik f Archiv. f.
Sozialwiss.y XX and XXL
106 On this point cf. the closing chapter in Harnack’s Dogmengeschichte and
F. CL Baur: Der Gegensatz des Kath. u. Prot . nach den Prinzipien und Haupt-
dogmen *, 1836.
PROTESTANTISM
475
not constitute a stage in the Divine creation of the world which is
more remote from the pure world of spirit; Nature is the sphere
appointed by the Creator for the realization of ideal values. These
values were completely realized in the Primitive State in the
perfection of human nature, and they are restored by Redemption.
They form an integral part of the life of the world as it now is,
and do not transcend it by a higher degree of mystical-sacra-
mental miraculous powers. The miraculous element is present,
certainly, but its purpose is simply the healing of the misery of
sin and the restoration of Nature, not the achievement of Super-
nature. This is a different conception of miracle altogether. In
the thought of Luther the miraculous element proceeds from the
saving will of God which takes away sin, not from Supernature
which constitutes the inmost heart of the Divine Being. This
means, however, that the idea of evolution has disappeared in its
Catholic form of an ascent from Nature to Grace, which Catholicism
had combined with the Aristotelian doctrine of the steady process
of the development of latent potentialities into actualities, or of
the whole process of Nature as a struggle towards perfection.
Man does not ascend from the Primitive State to a supernatural
perfection which has already been prepared by Nature; the
universe and the earth do not evolve from Nature into the realm
of Grace ; Society is not linked with a natural basis in order that
there may be a natural continuity between it and the super-
natural fellowship of Grace. In the Protestant theory everything
is complete in a moment, and the Aristotelian doctrine of evolu-
tion disappears, as well as the Neo-platonic theory of emanations.
The Fall does not mean a relapse into Nature, and Redemption
is not the ascent from Nature to Grace ; rather the idea is that the
Fall means the removal of Nature, and Redemption is its restora-
tion. This theory leaves no room for compromise, adaptation,
transitional processes, or evolution as in Catholic dogma ; all that
matters is the Fall of Man and his restoration to God. That is
why the Christian ethic is also not connected with and developed
out of a natural basis, but is restored by the miracle of Grace,
and then merely transferred, in a quite external manner, into the
sphere of activity provided by natural conditions which have to
be accepted in the spirit of obedience. This point of view shatters
the whole fabric of Catholic reconciliation in the realm* of meta-
physics and of ethics, as well as its doctrine of Society. Out of the
ruins there arises a very hard and artificial conception of life —
one in which there is no room for relative conceptions nor for any
process of evolution. This comes out very clearly in the difficulties
476 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
and inconsistencies of the Lutheran ethic , 207 which we shall be
studying later on.
Last of all, the whole change of view in Protestantism is summed
up and expressed in its Idea of God. This is no longer a blend of
the natural idea of the infinite absolute Substance which reveals
itself in varying degrees, and the personalistic conception of the
Divine Law which controls everything in Nature and in the
spiritual world and which, by grace, makes it possible to fulfil
the highest mystical law of revelation, with corresponding merit
and celestial happiness as a result. In his Idea of God Luther
discards scientific metaphysics and all attempts to reconcile the
finite with the infinite; with resolute anthropomorphism this
Idea of God is conceived as the Divine Will. No longer are the
ideas of Nature and Supernature placed side by side, but their
place is taken by the antitheses of the Law and the Gospel, the
moral demand and the loving will which forgives sins, retribution,
and grace. The method of harmonizing these elements is found
in the Atoning Death of the God-Man. The Atonement, therefore,
becomes the central doctrine of Protestantism, and the idea of
vicarious achievement, discarded in every other connection, is
here developed to its fullest extent.
In such a conception of God the motives and aims of religious
fellowship, and the justification of the natural social forms of life,
are quite different from those inspired by the Catholic Idea of
the Absolute Being, and of the development of the world from
Nature up to the miracle of Supernature. As we pursue this inquiry
further, it will become quite clear that this changed Idea of God
is the final cause of all the other changes which we are now about
to consider.
The preceding analysis has noted the essential elements in the
religious thought of the Reformation. It is manifest that these
ideas are not a mere renewal of Scriptural Christian piety,
whether of the Synoptic or of the Pauline and Johannine tradi-
tion, but that they represent a transference of mediaeval dogma,
the Mediaeval Church, and the mediaeval ethic, to a conception
of religion (drawn from Paul) as a matter of inward faith and a
new spirit ; in short, the Pauline religion of grace and of Christ.
This coiRes out particularly plainly in the new value given to the
natural life, which was only brought fully under Christian
influence in the Middle Ages. This connection between the natural
life and Christianity is retained ; it is only justified and made
practical for different reasons. Beneath the thought of the Protes-
, * 07 See p. 825.
PROTESTANTISM
477
tant Reformation there lay the fact of the mediaeval expansion of
Christianity. All that took place was that this mediaeval contribu-
tion was based afresh on new religious ideas and was reshaped
by them.
Sociological Effect of Luther’s Thought:
the New Conception of the Church
We now come to our second main question: What were the
sociological results of this religious transformation of Christianity?
The preceding paragraphs have already suggested a simple reply
to this question, at least so far as actual essentials are concerned.
But as we proceed with the inquiry in detail we shall discover
many difficulties which were caused by the complication of
these ideas.
In this connection the decisive element is not the peculiar
juridical form of the Lutheran conception of the Church (with
which the next section will deal), but, primarily, it is the funda-
mental fact that, from the very outset, this whole intellectual
outlook belongs, essentially, to the Church-type. This means that
the new conception of the Church fundamentally determines
the sociological outlook of all the Protestant groups and gives to
them its peculiar difficulties.
In spite of the fact that this school of thought has many affinities
with the sect-type, in spite of its individualism, its lay religion, its
appeal to the authority of the Bible, its emphasis upon the sub-
jective realization of salvation in personal and inward Christian
piety, and on the restriction of the true Church to real Christians,
who have been truly “born again” — in spite of all this, in its in-
most being it reveals no tendency whatever towards the sect-type ;
indeed, it regards the Church-type, in the most natural way, as
the only Christian type of ecclesiastical organization.
From the very outset this is what Luther intended: (i) the
reform of the ecclesiastical organ of grace and of redemption, so
that its true basis of grace may be revealed in the Word, in the
knowledge of Christ, and in the assurance of the forgiveness of
sins which springs from Christ; (2) the reform of the priesthood,
in order to restore it to its true office, instituted by Christ Himself,
of the proclamation of the Word, or “preaching Christ” ; (3) the
reform of the sacraments — that is, from rites which impart the
“substance of grace”, they are to be transformed into rites
appointed by Christ as “means of grace” which seal the assurance
of the Gospel of the forgiveness of sins.
Luther took for granted that, along with these demands for
478 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
reform, all baptized Christians, however immature or nominal
they might be, were included in the Church ; that Infant Baptism
should be retained and universally practised, and that the
efficacy of the means of grace is independent of the subjective
state both of the celebrant and of the soul which receives these
mysteries. Luther had no desire to found a new Church ; he simply
wished to introduce an instauratio catholica , that is, to lead the One
Catholic Apostolic Church, founded by Christ and endowed by
Him with ministry, Word, and Sacrament, back to its purely
spiritual activity of proclaiming the Word which creates faith.
The Word itself, however, its foundation in the Bible, its
manifestation in the Sacrament, and its proclamation in the
sermon, is to him an objective and precious endowment, intended
for the benefit of all the individuals in the world, which the
Church (as an institution) appropriates, and which is to be
administered in an orderly manner by officials appointed for that
purpose. Where officials of this kind do not exist laymen may
officiate in their stead. The layman who discharges this duty,
however, is thereby entitled to that precise share in the objective
treasury of grace. In this respect, in the significance of a Depositum
which the organ of grace established by Christ appropriates, and
in the complete independence of the organ of grace from any
standard of subjective realization, Luther’s conception of grace is
precisely the same as that of Catholicism. The differences lie only
in the conception of the content of grace. From that point of view,
however, both the nature and the method of influence of the
ecclesiastical institution are considerably different.
The hierarchical sacramental Church is replaced by the Church
which lays the main emphasis upon the Word of Scripture and its
proclamation by the preachers. This Church, however, is also an
institution set over its members as their supernatural source,
instituted and directed by God Himself. This Church is entirely
unaffected by the occurrence or non-occurrence of the subjective
effects of conversion in particular individuals : in itself it is holy
and Divine, through the converting power inherent in the
“Word” ; its position as a Divine institution is still supreme, even
when very few are actually “converted” souls, while as a united
body it extends its influence through all its special developments in
the form of a national church, or in other ways. For, where there is
the Word and the Sacrament, there is the Church, and the super-
natural source of all experiences of salvation ; and faith is certain
that “the Word of God never returns unto Him void”, that is,
that finally its indwelling miraculous power will yet overcome all
PROTESTANTISM
479
obstacles, and that in the end it must also inwardly convert
humanity to Christ. This will certainly never be a comprehensive
conversion including the whole of humanity. The Devil and
sin are too strong for that, and the confusions of the present
Church point to the End of the World, in which the great
conflict between Christ and Antichrist will bring the struggle
to a conclusion.
This conception of the Church is extremely spiritual and
idealistic, making the essence of the Church to consist in the
Word, the Sacrament, and the office of the ministry, and restrict-
ing it to a purely spiritual sphere of influence. It is, however,
always and supremely a “Church” conception. It is the Catholic
theory of the Church, only purified and renewed (in the New
Testament there is very little support for these ideas at all) ; it is a
transformation of the idea of a merely universal, all-inclusive
Church, with an unbroken priesthood, and an absolute possession
of truth, into the earlier and more primitive conception of a pure
Christocentric religion which exalted the ideas of grace and
faith, and whose only objective support is the word of Christ in the
Scriptures. The whole of the supernatural element in this Church
is focused in the “Word” — this idea gathers up all the objectivity
and holiness, the sense that the Church as an institution is inde-
pendent of the individual and personal point of view, and is, in
fact, entirely objective — this idea of the “Word”, however, is of
the very highest importance for the Protestant conception of the
Church. It constitutes the sociological point of contact, freed from
the subjective element, secured quite simply, and endowed with
a supernatural power of influence, from which, it is held, the
Church is to be reconstructed. This conception was the Protestant
equivalent for the Catholic episcopate, with its final centralization
in the Papacy. In addition, of course, stress is laid upon the fact
that the Church does not consist merely in the “Word”, but in
the interior personal influence of the Word, and thus in the
“holy community”, the fellowship composed of those who have
been truly born again. This reveals Luther’s principle of personal
piety and of spirituality, and (as will appear later on) it was to this
aspect of his teaching that the Anabaptists and the sectarians
actually appealed. In Luther’s mind, however, this ^renewed
inward fellowship was always only the correlate of the Word of
Grace, and the ministry of the Word which has produced this
fellowship ; this holds good whether the message was given by an
ordained minister or by some lay Christian brother. Since, how-
ever, in practice it was impossible to distinguish the converted from
480 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the unconverted by any external sign, this attempt to limit the
meaning of the Church had no practical significance at all. In
reality, wherever the Word is preached, there is the Church. Even
if there were only one solitary believer in a certain place, there the
Church would exist as an institution, for the Church is virtually
contained in the Word, as the creator of the fellowship perpetually
exercising its miraculous influence, and never in vain. The Church
would still exist even if there were nothing left save the Word.
From that source it would ever arise anew. It is the duty of all
Christians, and especially of Christian rulers (in whom alone,
indeed, at first Christendom is rightly represented), to render the
Word accessible to every one, to arrange for its regular proclama-
tion, and thus, at least in external matters, to do what is necessary
to ensure the establishment of the supremacy of the Word, in order
that everywhere the Church may arise out of the Word “in spirit
and in truth”. The method by which this is to be effected —
whether through some future General Council, or, if that is im-
possible, through the nearest authorities who can be appointed in
the district and in the whole country, together with their natural
counsellors, the professional theologians — is simply a matter of
convenience, a question of linking on to the positive law which is
already in existence. In all this, however, as far as possible all
violent excitement is to be avoided, and until order has been
evolved out of confusion the matter may be handled in very
different ways — Luther, indeed, expresses very varying and in-
consistent opinions on this point. When he is confronted with the
question of a non-Protestant Government he feels it needful to
organize a body which shall be entirely independent of the
State; when this happens he emphasizes the fact that the secular
power must not interfere in spiritual matters.
The result of these ideas is obvious : if universal order is not
affected by the Empire or by a Council, and if the expectation of
the approaching End of the World which is rife amid all this
confusion is also not fulfilled, it then becomes the duty of the
laity, and especially of the rulers, to help the Word of God to
have free course, as Occam and the Conciliar theologians had
already demanded — a demand which was entirely in accord with
the whok previous outlook of Christian Society. This does not do
away with the idea of the “holy Church throughout the world”
which Catholicism preserves; for wherever the Word is present
in any Church at all, there is the universal Church, and the par-
ticular Church in question is only a section or a corruption of
the one universal Church. The “Invisible Church” is not the right
PROTESTANTISM
481
term for Luther’s conception of the Church, although he himself
sometimes uses this confusing expression; what he really meant
was that the Church is visible in the Word and the Sacrament,
but invisible and incalculable in her purely spiritual influence.
His idea might be expressed rather differently, somewhat in this
way: the Church of the Word is purely spiritual, effecting the
New Birth by means which cannot be defined outwardly, while
at the same time she is present in the Word and the Sacrament
and endued with the possibility of exercising a universal influence
upon the State and upon Society, (which for that very reason
means that she requires an external Christian organization
of the State) which will make it possible for the Church to
reach everyone, while otherwise her own organization is left
very free.
Luther and the Reformers, like the Catholic theologians, focus
Christian thought in the theory of the conception of the Church.
This, however, is no mere relic of mediaeval thought, a barrier
which can easily be swept away, but it is part of the very essence
of its religious thought, which, in this respect, is entirely in agree-
ment with the mediaeval and primitive conception of the Church,
traced back to its very beginnings in St. Paul. Stated quite simply,
the one thing we need to realize is this : Luther conceived and
understood Christianity essentially as grace, as the basis of the
assurance of salvation. A soul with this point of view is pre-
destined to belong to the Church-type. To this type of mind
salvation is something finished, certain and sure, a pure gift of
God, independent of the ego, of all one’s own struggles and
subjective efforts, and only has to be appropriated by faith ; the
soul then absorbs the great principle of an objective Divine
creative energy, which effects everything in and through the
individual, while it is itself quite independent of the individual.
It is the profound conception of an historical life-substance
which first produces all individuals, combined with the religious
idea of grace, in accordance with which the possession of faith is
a gift, not an achievement. This means, further, that it is only
through this most precious gift that the powers of the individual
are set free to develop their highest and richest possibilities. Both
these phenomena, however — the historic substance* and the
element of grace which it contains — are conceived as a super-
natural institution, strictly distinguished from all that is secular,
whose fundamental supernatural elements, the Word and the
Sacrament, produce faith, freely and inwardly, without com-
pulsion and apart from external law, through the Divine energy
vol. n. c
482 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
which they contain. 208 In Luther’s view a Divine operation of
this kind could not be based upon the subjective foundation of
individual illumination and mystical knowledge — experiences
which often cannot be disentangled from the phantasy of the
individual. He felt that the Divine operation must be manifested
in something objective, “given”, the same for all, something
entirely authoritative, miraculous, and definite, standing out in
clear relief against all that is merely human. To him this objective
element was summed up only in the Divine institution of the
Church, and in the Divine Word, through which the Church
becomes outwardly visible, and is, indeed, its creative centre.
This is the reason why Luther opposed the sectarians with such
heat, because they regarded the basis of salvation and the bond
of fellowship as consisting in obedience to the Law of God and
therefore in subjective attainment. All forms of sociological
development which were made concrete in the idea of law were
suspect to Luther. In spite of the fact that the Law was part of
the Divine revelation, he still insisted that it could not serve as a
basis for salvation or for fellowship because law cannot exist
without subjective achievement, and therefore it would again
lead to placing the main stress upon the subjective achievement
of man rather than on the “givenness” of the Grace of God. Like-
wise he would have nothing to do with mystics, enthusiasts, or
fanatics. He held that in their “illuminations” there was nothing
objective, no creative element of unmistakably Divine origin,
upon which their fellowship was based. Rather, he believed that
these “lights” were the creation of their own minds — auto-sugges-
tion, in fact — which they tried to prove, later on, to be of Divine
origin, by practical achievements or by the subjective fulfilment
of the Law. This is why, in his study of the Bible, Luther discerned
solely the Pauline and Johannine type of doctrine; that is, the
type in which grace, and its objective assurance in the Body of
Christ and in the Person of Christ, is everything. The Christ of
the Synoptic Gospels, however, the Christ proclaimed by the
Franciscans and the Waldensians, made no appeal to him whatso-
ever. Neither had Luther any interest in the Law of Christ, so
far as this could be regarded as a general rule of life and a basis
of Christian fellowship. It never seems to have occurred to him
that there might possibly be some other interpretation of Christ
and His Law than that proclaimed by legalistic orthodox sect-
arians. Luther makes Paul his doctrinal standard in everything,
and even in Paul he ignores all the “enthusiastic” and mystical
808 See p. 825.
PROTESTANTISM
483
features, and concentrates on his idea of the Church. To Luther,
therefore, Infant Baptism was absolutely essential, as it is to all
men of the Church-type. He held that this Sacrament is the
outward sign and seal of the objective, universal, world- wide
claim of the Church, asserting her will over every individual ; it
also represents the pure “givenness” of grace, the independence
of the Church of all individualistic subjective effort and achieve-
ment, and, finally, it stands for the utmost comprehensiveness,
implying that the Church is composed of Christians at all stages
of experience, from the simplest believer to the greatest saint.
Luther regarded Adult Baptism and rebaptism, on the contrary,
as a symbol of legalism and of the sectarian spirit, which bases
fellowship and salvation upon personal subjective achievement.
The doctrinal expression of the idea of Baptism itself was still
regarded as a matter of no particular importance, but logically it
approximated more and more to the idea of an actual miracle of
regeneration, which gives to all who have been baptized — in the
possibility of appealing to the fact of their baptism — a character
indelebilis. Every experience of repentance and conversion, and
the entire work of the religious and moral life, means a renewal of
baptismal grace, in which grace is fundamentally assured to every
member of the Church, just as an entail belongs to all those who
have been born into it. As time went on, in the interest of this
objective institutional character of the Church, Luther laid more
and more emphasis upon the sacraments, in which the Word
which creates salvation reveals its objective aspect, and in which
the Sacrament of Holy Communion in particular, in the Real
Presence of Christ in His Flesh and Blood, reaches the highest
point of objectivity. In this emphasis Luther established the
distinctive character of Lutheran theology, whereas the Calvinists
were content to regard the sacraments simply as tokens which
conveyed the certainty of grace and the spiritual character of the
Word. Thus Luther restored the practice of confession as a means
of conveying the objective assurance of absolution through the
ministry of the Word, and also in order to ensure a thorough
preparation, through self-examination, for the reception of the
Word of God which was contained in the Word of absolution . 209
This whole tendency arose quite logically out of Luther’s own
personal position, which was determined by his training in
scholastic theology, as well as by his original interpretation of the
Bible. For lack of more exact knowledge it is impossible to decide,
at this distance of time, to what extent his views may also have
109 Cf. E. Fischer: Z ur Gesch. der evangelischen Beichte , 1903.
484 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
been affected by his personal temperament, as well as by the
atmosphere in which he lived, which was steeped in the idea of
authority. It is manifest that Luther was strongly inclined towards
the side of authority, in spite of all his sense of the need for inner
freedom, and it is Ice wise evident that he was essentially con-
servatively inclined, in of all his fearlessness and recklessness
in instances when he was urged forward by his conscience. It
seems, however, almost certain, that while these ideas affected the
special form in which, later on, he formulated his conception of
the Church (and above all, as we shall see, his conception of
Natural Law), yet they did not affect the central idea, the con-
ception of the Church itself. This central conception was essen-
tially bound up with his idea of grace and the Word, with his
conservative attitude in questions of revelation, especially in cases
of supposed “illumination” and “new revelation”, and with his
aversion to every other rule of life save that of the revelation
through grace, which possessed its objective standard in the Word
and the Church, upon the basis of which it was then possible to
adapt oneself to the life of the world. To erect any other standard
seemed to Luther to savour of subjectivism and fanaticism, or of
dependence upon “good works”, and therefore to betray a
legalistic spirit . 210
Thus we see that the whole of the thought of the Reformation
was dominated by the Church-type, which was due in the last
resort to the religious originality of the Reformation itself. Luther
was only able to exert his enormous influence on world-history as
a Reformer of the Church. It was only because he held so firmly
to the idea of the supernatural universal character of the Church
that he was able to have an influence on institutions of a universal
character. Without this conception Luther would have been
merely the founder of a new sect, or of a new Religious Order, or
even a solitary individual like Sebastian Franck.
Sociological Effects of
this Conception of the Church
This predominance of the Church-type, however, meant that
all the essential sociological effects also appeared. It led first of
all to the Remand for the uniformity, unity, and universal dominion
of the Church, which, in the impossibility of carrying throjgh a
thorough Reformation, either European or German, finally led
to the establishment of united Territorial Churches. Secondly,
this emphasis on universality led to the extension of the ecclesi-
210 See p. 827.
PROTESTANTISM
485
astical ethic into the sphere of secular civilization and of the social
order, to the acceptance of the general order of life which did not
harmonize directly with the Christian moral ideal, but which
was inevitable; and, finally, to the perpetuation of the funda-
mental conception of the Lex Naturae , which was the complement
of the purely Christian ethic . 211
That these effects were the natural product of the Church-type
is apparent from the fact that Luther himself did not accept these
conclusions at all easily ; only gradually did they force themselves
upon his mind with increasing insistence as inevitable and logical
deductions from the idea of the Church. He only developed the
idea of universality with difficulty, and almost in spite of himself.
This was due to the fact that the idea of the compulsory dominion
of a Universal Church was opposed to his spiritual and inward
conception of the nature of the Church, and also because his pre-
occupation with the idea of the priesthood of all believers inciden-
tally brought him very close to the sect-type, with its method of
building up a Church fellowship on the basis of voluntary in-
dividual membership. Nor did the extension of the ethic of the
Church into the social sphere take place without hesitation and
misgiving ; this was due to the fact that Luther’s emphasis upon
the Bible led him into deep sympathy with the Gospel ethic of
love, which was utterly opposed to the ordinary life of the world,
to the secular nature of the struggle for existence, to the lust of
power, to law, and to the desire to amass possessions; thus in this
direction also he came into touch with the sectarian ethic.
Let us now turn to the first result of Luther’s conception of the
Church.
(I) Absolute Conception of Truth
With the supernatural idea of the Church — which regards the
Church as a Divine foundation, endowed with a truth absolutely
authoritative, and secure against all merely human opinion — there
was constituted the absolute conception of Truth, which implied
unity, unchangeable character, universality, and infallibility of
the Church in the heart of the organization upon which it was
based.
In Catholicism this idea was achieved through degma and
tradition, through the hierarchy and the sacraments, and from
this fundamental impulse it developed into the world-dominating
system which was finally forced to inscribe upon its banner its prin-
ciple of compulsion, in direct opposition to its original principles.
211 See p. 829.
486 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
In Protestantism this central fact was the Word of the Scriptures,
and the Sacrament which was the sign and seal of the Gospel,
with the natural result of an ordered ministry of the Word, which
was, however, dependent upon circumstances for the way in
which it was to be exercised. Protestantism, therefore, was faced
with a twofold problem : (a) to stabilize the definition of the “pure
Word”, and ( b ) to organize a ministry of the Word, which would
proclaim the Faith in its purity. In both directions, however, the
new conception of the Church experienced considerable difficulty.
The Word which lay at the root of this conception should be, in
Luther’s great and free way of thinking, the activity of Christ —
the Pauline and Johannine conception of Christ contained in the
Bible, interpreted in the sense of the Nicene Creed and the Creed
of Chalcedon, through the doctrine of the Trinity. But how was
this Word to be defined within the Bible? Its free development
beyond the Bible, and its basis upon personal experience, opened
the door to the most varied interpretations, and to new mystical
interpretations which went far beyond the standpoint of the
Bible. The only course to pursue was to close the door, to make a
very clear distinction between the free proclamation of the Word
and its written foundation in the Bible. Then the proclamation
of the message was closely connected with its written basis, the
Bible as a whole was canonized, in harmony with the dogma of
the early Conciliar legislation, while its exposition was regulated
by fixed standards, drawn from the Scriptures themselves, that is,
from Paulinism. Thus the Protestant dogma of the Bible was
created, according to which the Bible is the centre of the Church,
the absolutely inspired authority, and the operative power of
salvation through the converting power which dwells within
it. The Bible proves and manifests its own infallibility by the Holy
Spirit who dwells within it; its meaning is sufficiently clear to
enable it to overcome all difficulties arising out of varieties of
interpretation. This result was inevitable, if the conception of the
Church were really to be based upon the Bible, and thus to attain
genuine stability. Thus with Luther himself the rudimentary
beginnings of a free historical human interpretation of the Bible
disappeared, and the process was completed in the subsequent
period of ^orthodoxy. The conception of the Church as the organ
of salvation, Divinely instituted, required once for all a truth
which should be firmly established, clearly defined, equally
binding upon all, and this conception of truth required the abso-
lute authority of the Bible, which would be impossible apart from
a kind of literary Incarnation of the Divine. The Protestant
PROTESTANTISM
487
extension of the Incarnation in the Bible corresponds to the
Catholic extension of the Incarnation in the priesthood. The
historic-human Bible criticism, and the establishment of the
validity of the Bible upon the personal experience of salvation,
was the weak point in the whole idea of the Church . 212
(II) The Ministry of the Word
The other question, namely, the problem of the organization
of a ministry for the proclamation of the Word, was no less
difficult. The Word is the support of the Church, and not a
hierarchy based on apostolic succession. The essence of the Word,
however, consists in its power of forming personal conviction and
of producing the New Birth. Thus the real supporters of the
Church are Christians who have been born again through
the Word, genuinely converted and live Christian people, and the
direction of the organization of the Church is in their hands. Thus
the Church seems to be constituted by the co-operation and strict
Christian piety of its members. This, however, only seemed to be
the case. In reality, the situation was quite different. In the
confusion of the period of transition, when the adherents of the
old religion and the associates of the Augsburg Confession still
worshipped together, when the order of the Roman Church had
not yet been discarded, and the new order had not yet been
established, when men still hoped that a Council or an order on
the part of the Empire might find a way out of the impasse, and
when these hopes had been shattered, Luther began to believe
the End of the World was imminent, and that the only Church
organization which mattered was the gathering of the faithful
into groups to prepare for the Second Advent. It was then that
Luther gave several instructions about the formation of smaller
groups of genuine believers, with their own Christian order of life,
and a distinct practice of confession and communion, based on
the principle of financial self-support and the right to call their
own pastors. This happened during the period of ferment, when
the attempts at reform were purely local, the time when Luther
allowed the congregations to make experiments based on the
principle of the priesthood of all believers. By some this period }ias
been described as a complete break with the Catholic idea of the
Church; by others, on the contrary, it has often been Excused as
a temporary deviation towards the sect-type. In reality, both these
interpretations are incorrect. This “congregational ideal” does
not in any way mean that the idea of the Church as an institution
212 See p. 830.
488 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
has been renounced. For these smaller and purer Christian groups
have also been created by the Word, and their view of doctrine
is always exercised by means of a wonderful agreement produced
by the Word and its miraculous power; the congregation is only
the product of the heart of the institution, of the Word, and never
the factor which produces the Christian fellowship itself. More-
over, these groups are only regarded as the kernel of Christendom,
as a temporary means of education, which by their example and
influence are to educate men from whom the Word shall again go
forth to mankind in general. Not only, however, is the institutional
conception of the Church preserved, but the tendency towards
universality, and towards a state of affairs in which, ultimately, a
given territory and the religion of that territory would coincide,
with some unimportant fluctuations, is also retained. In all this,
however, it is assumed that, sooner or later, matters will come
to a head, and that the final issue of all these events will be either
the End of the World, or, if the world is to continue in existence,
a universal reform of the Church. Luther, indeed, only turned to
the idea of this group organization after the appeal to the nobility
(that is, to the ruling princes) had failed, and the hope of a General
Council had been indefinitely postponed. In his mind these groups
were to be meetings of the faithful during the dissolution of the
Church before the coming of Antichrist; he regards the vital
unity of the Church as so essential and natural that he can only
account for its breakdown by regarding it as a sign of the begin-
ning of the final throes of a dying era. These groups were to be
merely temporary forms of organization ; there was to be nothing
final about them. It is also obvious that in addition to these
groups he was counting on the power of a Christian Government
to maintain the Christian order of life, and to defend it against
“tumult” and open blasphemy. Indeed, he only recommends this
new form of congregational organization in cases where the
existing Church-order and the rights of patronage exclude the
reform of the whole parish in the Protestant sense. In such a case
the Christians who have become genuinely “evangelical” ought
to form a group, and if they appoint one of their members as a
preacher it should be a priest who has adopted the new views ;
in this way the continuity of Church-order will be secured. Further,
these groups ought to act as far as possible through their natural
representatives, the local authorities, in order that all should be
done in harmony with the existing order, and in the interests of
the ChurclTand not at the caprice of individuals. Public worship
should be open to all ; it is only the more select body of communi-
PROTESTANTISM
489
cants which is to have a closer form of special organization ;
Infant Baptism, of course, is to be administered as before, and
the children and young people must receive religious instruction.
All these experiments, however, are to cease from the moment
that it has been decided that a Reformation of the Church at
large is out of the question ; that is, when action no longer has to
be regulated by the points of view prevailing in the various
parishes which often were entirely opposed to each other, but
when the countries which have accepted the principles of the
Reformation proceed to undertake an independent united organ-
ization of their ecclesiastical affairs. When that took place it was
quite natural that the ruling princes and the civil authorities, as
parishioners who are bound to obey the Word of God, and as the
appointed representatives of the parishes, should undertake to set
the Church in order by means of special “Visitations”, and to
establish the dominion of the “pure Word”, which, at least in its
purity, must be set everywhere upon the lampstand, that all may
rejoice in its light. This “group ideal”, which had only been
understood in a very relative sense, disappeared entirely, and the
idea of a universal world-wide Church was replaced by the
Territorial Church system, without, however, doing away with the
idea of the universal Catholic Church, since wherever the ministry
of the Word and the administration of the sacraments are practised,
even under very different forms, there is the Catholic Church.
With his conception of the universal united Church, Luther can
only explain the apostasy of the Roman Church by declaring that
the Pope is the Antichrist who was prophesied in the Apocalypse ;
in this way he removes the stumbling-block created by the falling
away of so large and permanent a section from the original
pure Church of the Word, so long as the ideal is retained of a
universal Church, ruled by God Himself, outside which there can
be no salvation. That which has already been Divinely foretold
can be no argument against the institution of the “pure Church”
set up by God Himself.
(Ill) The Territorial Church System
The Territorial Church system, therefore, finally secures the
following elements: the universal character of the Church, its
claim to dominate the life of the world, the maintenance of “pure
doctrine”, and an ordered ministry on orthodox lines. Naturally
Luther did not want the ruling princes to control the Church;
this development was due rather to a logical development from
the situation in the later Middle Ages, and, in any case, it was
490 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
inevitable once the whole organization had been entrusted to the
rulers of the different States. All that Luther desired was to
secure the kind offices of the various Governments for the Church,
but he also expected that the Word of God within these churches
would be left entirely free. This ideal of Luther implied a division
of authority within the social order which involved many diffi-
culties from the very outset. In its purely Lutheran sense it was
only possible to maintain this ideal in the over-idealistic belief
that the Word would spontaneously produce within the Church
a harmonious understanding of the truths of Scripture and a clear
message; further, so far as events outside the Church were con-
cerned, Luther held that the Word would teach the Government
what to do, and that the laity would accept its ruling in free and
willing obedience, so far, that is, as the right way had not already
been made plain by the Law of Nature. Since church-order is no
longer regulated by the legal supremacy of the hierarchy, the
whole question is now entrusted to the influence of the Word
itself, an influence which can never fail to produce an effect, an
influence which is both united and uniting, an influence, which,
apart from violent human efforts, will create the unity of the
Corpus Christianum . When the Word fails to do this the only
conclusion that can be drawn is that this failure is due to the
power of sin and of the Devil, as so often happens in this wicked
world. At this point Luther came very near to the eschatological
apocalyptic point of view, in which the one thing that matters is
that in the evil of these latter days individuals shall save their
souls through faith and patience. This close connection between
the renunciation of the uniform Christian order and the eschato-
logical temper, as well as the close connection between plans
made with permanent conditions in view and the reform of the
whole life of Christendom, reveal more clearly than anything else
that in his conception of the Church Luther had not given up
the idea of universality, nor the ideal of a spiritual dominion over
the whole of life ; it would, indeed, have been impossible for him
to give up this hope, since it was based upon the assumption that
the purified Church also possesses the absolute Truth which alone
can bring salvation to mankind. These fluctuations and these
early expressions of a “group ideal” do certainly show very
plainly tHfe peculiar nature of the Lutheran church conception.
Luther evidently believed that it was possible to base the uniform
and all-embracing dominion of the Word purely upon inward
personal conviction and fellowship, purely upon faith in this
Word working through love, while the question of external
PROTESTANTISM
491
organization was ignored. In his conception of the “Word” and
of “Faith” Luther wished to combine the objective character of
an institution with the subjectivism of personal Christian piety,
as the fundamental creative forces within the Church. He found
it very difficult, however, to combine these two opposite idea s,
and it is therefore not surprising that this conception of the
Church went far beyond Luther’s own ideal, first in one direction
and then in another . 213
Since, however, the universal character of the Church was thus
restored, not merely through the power of the Word, but by the
maintenance of an external Christendom on political lines, and
by the creation of a Territorial Church organization, Luther’s
conception of the Church was obliged to adopt a further element,
which was quite alien to his own thought, but which became
logically necessary if the unity and universality of the Church
were to be retained, that is, the compulsory supremacy of this
uniform ecclesiastical system.
The principle of a pure religion based on faith and personal
conviction alone logically implied the voluntary principle of
Church membership. And in fact, in his early days as a Reformer,
Luther spoke out very strongly in favour of liberty of conscience
and freedom to proclaim the Word by purely spiritual means. He
had no desire to see the adherents of the “old religion” compelled
into any kind of conversion by force from outside ; much less did
he desire to see this policy applied to those who lived under the
new conditions. The Word was to be left free and untrammelled,
and to overcome everything by its own spiritual influence. The
emphasis, however, was laid upon faith in the miraculous power
of the “pure Word”, which alone contains converting power. “Set
the Word free”, he seemed to say, “and the human and priestly
illusion will fade away and disappear.” Thus Luther was not a
champion of religious toleration ; the cause for which he fought
was the freedom of the Word to exercise its purely spiritual
influence without the aid of external compulsion. The religious
toleration which was possible from the standpoint of the Lutheran
conception of the Church may be thus expressed: it did not
consist in a toleration based upon the right of individuals to hold
varying convictions, because in religious matters it is impossible
to judge objectively, and compulsion in such matters is futile; it
was rather the absolute certainty of the sole truth of the Lutheran
position, or, rather, of the Divine nature of the Word, and of its
capacity to propagate itself on purely spiritual lines. Here also,
213 See p. 831.
492 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
however, the cessation of conflict was only to be a provisional
arrangement during the^time of ferment and transition ; Luther
never doubted that the Word would finally triumph, that is, as
soon as he realized that these conflicts were not the sign of the
approaching End of the World, but the birth-pangs of a new and
more settled era. He was, however, obliged to go through the
experience, common to every faith of this kind, and one which
the Primitive Church had already undergone — namely, that
thought and faith alone can never attain an unlimited universal
dominion by purely spiritual methods, and that restriction to
these methods indeed endangers the stability both of the univers-
ality and of the unity of the Church. Thus Luther also was
obhged to resort to compulsory methods, which, just as in the
case of the Catholic Church, were not exercised by the Church
but by the State. The Church was to exercise her functions in
freedom and in love, and in the face of opposition she was merely
to warn and exhort. But in order to ensure that all citizens
should be baptized and come under the control of the Church,
the custom was introduced of uniting all civil rights with the
exercise of the Christian religion, and in cases of permanent
heresy the State intervened with its penalties, since heresy also is
a breach in the social order. Both institutions, the unity of the
social and civil order and of the ecclesiastical and spiritual order,
are, quite naturally, co-terminous, just as they were in the Middle
Ages. If, however, this agreement does not evolve quite automati-
cally, it then becomes the duty of the State, at least outwardly, to
make any sign of permanent opposition impossible . 214 Further, in
view of the illiteracy and immaturity of the masses, it might seem
as though it were quite justifiable to compel them to accept truth
and salvation; even at the present day the State is still in the
compulsory stage, and in countless ways, by the compulsory
creation of a certain atmosphere, it forces men for their own good,
just as every party, every group, and indeed even artistic and
scientific movements only maintain their spiritual unity by
compulsory methods of a coarser or more refined kind, whether
direct or indirect. In the last resort no sociological cohesion can
possibly exist permanently without some method of compulsion
This is a feet of life, and all faith in the exclusive power of pure
thought is an idealistic illusion; it does not belong to the sphere
of reality. Above all, however, an association which is based upon
that absolute Truth which alone can “make men wise unto
salvation ’ 5 (which requires, at the very least, that this truth
214 See p. 833.
PROTESTANTISM
493
should be made accessible to all, and also needs protection against
the obstinate undermining of its influence) cannot do without
such methods of compulsion. On this question Luther completely
revised his earlier idealism, since, in addition to the claim that
this truth should be made accessible to all, he also demanded that
all heresies which disturbed the order of the Christian common-
weal in general should be removed forcibly by the authorities.
This demand was aimed primarily at the Anabaptists, with their
different ideal of Church and State. Finally, however, and quite
logically, purely doctrinal heresies came under the heading of a
“disturbance of Christian society”, which, in the interest of the
Corpus Christianum , it was the duty of the State to suppress. In the
kind of penalties inflicted, too, the Wittenberger authorities
became increasingly severe. Exile was followed by imprisonment
for life, and then even by capital punishment — all these penalties
were inflicted in the name of the State, after the offenders had
been duly warned by Christian exhortation. But even the Catholic
Church did not thirst for blood in this harsh manner ; it allowed
heretics to be punished by the State as obstinate disturbers of
the peace and harmony of the Christian Society. Melancthon’s
attempt to justify these methods shows how much the Reformers
felt this was a question of the preservation of Christian social
unity ; he argued that the punishment of heretics is required by
the Natural Law, the fundamental law of a united society, to
which the Christian Law is its complement, since the Natural
Law itself desires the protection of religion. It is obvious that this
position was entirely opposed to Luther’s earlier point of view ;
yet it was not an entire denial of his earlier ideals. It was, indeed,
a logical development from the ideal of a united Church, as soon
as he realized that the Word could not be established upon
a purely spiritual propaganda, and a permanent church-order
became desirable. Luther was not driven to adopt this position
by the law of the Empire, or by the political situation of the day.
This point of view developed spontaneously out of the idea of the
Church as the only organ of salvation which is obliged to protect
sinners, great and small, from the forces of temptation. It is un-
deniable that Luther and the jurists of Wittenberg did set up a
terribly cruel system of compulsion against “Zwinglians^ despisers
of the sacraments, fanatics and Anabaptists”. They did this not
simply under the pressure of the ruling princes, whose own interests
were involved in the unity of the Church, and who were also very
nervous about the influence of the Anabaptists. No, they adopted
this policy deliberately, of their own free will, without, however,
494 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
giving up the theory that the Church ought to exercise her
influence solely on spiritual lines. It was a form of self-deception
which is possible to men who believe that they are in possession
of absolute Truth, and who are therefore honestly convinced that
it is right to claim from the political authorities toleration for the
Truth, but no toleration for falsehood. It is not the Church, as
such, which punishes the rebels, and gets rid of them by violent
methods, but the ideal created by the Church of the universal
dominion of the only saving Truth over Society, the absolutist
objective conception of truth, and the universal idea of Christian
society supported by it . 215
The Protestant Ethic and Compromise
Parallel with the development of this first logical outcome of
the Church-type is the second result, namely, the steady develop-
ment of an ethic which accepts the life of the world.
At first Luther’s ethic had a tendency towards a radical Christ-
ianity, which was only concerned with “spiritual” matters and
was aloof from and indifferent to the world. It was only gradually
that Luther learnt to balance this tendency with the idea of the
Christian nature of society required by the ecclesiastical concep-
tion, which always seemed very natural to him, and with the
natural institutions of the State. Here, too, this development did
not take place without many violent contradictions, and, just as
the contradictions in the idea of the Church caused the compli-
cated character of the Protestant relation between Church and
State, so the contradictions and tensions contained in the Lutheran
ethic caused the difficulties in the Protestant social philosophy . 216
In itself Luther’s Christian piety was a return to the purely
religious character of the Christian ethic, to which he was led in
like manner, even though with varieties of emphasis, by the
mystical doctrine of the supreme and unique value of the love of
God, by the main Augustinian formula of the Christian ethic of
the love of all things in God alone and for the sake of God, and
the Gospel message of Jesus of sanctification of the self for the
love of God, and of love of the brethren for His sake. As law, the
moral law disappears entirely, and he again exalts the free pur-
posive character of ethics, which knows only one absolute aim,
that of self-surrender to God in faith. Luther then claims that
out of this supreme end (which alone is valid) the whole Christian
Ethos with a great variety of motive will evolve quite naturally.
The fluctuations in these various motives only show that in
N 6 See p, 833. 8ie See p. 836.
PROTESTANTISM
495
Luther’s mind the attainment of a fundamental religious position
was the one genuine moral imperative, and that, as soon as the
central question had been settled, everything else seemed com-
paratively indifferent and obvious. It is the return to the ethic of
the Gospel ; the only difference is that its imperative character has
been transformed by the apostolic doctrine of grace, which means
that the element of demand is only interpreted as a result and a
gift of faith, through surrender to the grace which is revealed in
and guaranteed by Christ. Faith is the highest and the most real
moral demand, and at the same time it is a gift of grace : this is
the high paradox and the leading idea of the ethic of Luther.
Conduct, however, flows from this naturally. From this point of
view Luther rejects all legal moralism to the point of the danger
of antinomian consequences. Above all, Luther discards all the
reconciliations and transitions of the Catholic ethic, which, by
means of its casuistry, had always managed to connect the natural
stage of life with the higher stage of asceticism, mysticism, and
supernature. Luther defines as the heart and centre of Christian
morality solely that pure inwardness of spirit, of trust in God in
pain and trial, and that brotherly love which is completely self-
sacrificing, which renounces all secular rights, the use of power
and of force, and, indeed, of all right over one’s own property.
From the very beginning this genuinely Christian ethic had been
strongly tinged with a kind of mystical spirituality, and to a large
extent it remained so, in contrast with the purely practical ethic
of the Gospel, which treats moral behaviour as a means of entering
into union with God, and estimates it according to its power to
effect this union . 217
Over and over again, in countless passages, Luther has ex-
pressed the characteristic principles of this ethic, which consists
in aloofness from the world, and in the concentration of
attention upon the question of personal salvation and of the
unity of the brethren in the love of God. He also makes it quite
plain that this ethic of love and salvation is opposed to the ethic
which is produced by the struggle for existence, with its concern
with questions relating to law, honour, war, the State, and retribu-
tion. The Christian is actually only concerned with the life of the
world on the side of his physical existence, because fois life is
temporarily involved in the conditions of earthly existence. To
him the real laws of Christian behaviour are those laid down in
the Sermon on the Mount: “Resist not evil”. . . . “Love your
enemies”. . . and all that suggests that evil can be overcome by
817 See p. 836.
496 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
love. True Christians have no need of the State, nor do they need
the protection of the law for their private property. Natural
opportunities for exercising this faith — which for the sake of
happiness in God renounces all else and puts itself out freely in
love — are to be used when they occur, just as the Gospel suggests ;
there is no need to create special conditions or to induce an
artificial state for extraordinary sacrifices, as in monasticism.
But this radical religious ethic, especially in the earlier statements
of Luther, is entirely remote from the whole sphere of reason,
might, law, force, to which the Christian only submits because it
all forms part of this sinful world, and because, as things are in
this world, it is impossible to render loving service to one’s neigh-
bour without using these secular institutions . 218
The deduction of ethical behaviour from the religious element
is still not very certain ; it was, however, evidently intended, for
Luther’s faith is a “living, busy, and active thing”. It is more
difficult to determine in what way from the standpoint of this
definitely religious general ethic of sentiment the real standard
of the content of the Christian life was formed, and especially to
estimate its attitude towards the “this-world” (intramundane)
values and institutions which are so difficult to adjust to the
demands of the radical ethic of love. Theologians usually deal
exhaustively with that first general question of the basis of the
ethical element in the religious sphere, but they neglect this
second problem, because even in the Gospel itself they usually
do not feel that there is any difficulty at all in discovering how it is
possible to develop a “this-world” morality out of an ethic based
on the absolute religious values of love to God and love of the
brethren. In reality, however, it is this fundamental problem of
Christian ethics which reappears in Luther’s teaching. The
Catholic compromise of a natural and a supernatural ethic has
been destroyed, since to Luther a natural ethic, produced by
human strength alone, would have seemed a complete denial of
grace, and the limitation of the ethic of grace to the mystical
higher life which exists alongside of the natural life would have
seemed a misinterpretation and a narrowing of the Christian
ethic which ought to influence the whole man. Luther’s ideal
was the ^restoration of the purely religious ethic, which, at the
same time, should be applied unceasingly to the whole man.
Since — whether in the mystical and spiritual sense, or in the spirit
of the Sermon on the Mount — Luther emphasizes the real Christian
ethic of the love of God and man in its completely radical sense,
218 See p. 837.
PROTESTANTISM
497
while at the same time he alters the whole idea of Christian piety
by transforming the idea of piety as mere membership in a sacra-
mental institution into one of real complete inwardness of spirit ;
from this point of view also he seems to come very near to the
sect-type, and to its radical Christianity of detachment from the
world ; just as he also emphasizes repeatedly the rarity of true
Christians and the smallness of the true Church, which he explains
by saying that the last Judgment and the great apostasy are near
at hand. In reality, those elements in Luther, which, in the tradi-
tional view, are often held to be relics of monasticism, are in the
main, though not entirely, due to evangelical radicalism, for the
understanding of which it is true that monasticism in certain
respects is certainly a help. It is also, for the very same reason,
an approximation to the sect-type . 219
There is here, however, no real fusion whatever with the sect-
type. Luther always rejected such ideas very clearly and even
passionately. But he never systematically and theoretically
formulated the reasons for this refusal. One of the great funda-
mental self-evident elements of Luther’s thought, however, lies
behind this refusal, and in order to discover this our first endeavour
must be to try to discover the ultimate reason for the form in
which he shaped his positive ethic.
The reason which Luther gives most frequently is the definite
rejection of legalism. In his mind insistence on the necessity for a
radical Christianity expressing itself in life and behaviour meant
an emphasis on “works” instead of upon “grace”. He held that
although the inner spirit of these “works” might be strongly
emphasized, the real criterion of the state of the Christian would
still be human achievement. Such an idea, however, is opposed
to theTundamental idea of grace, which*can only be appropriated
through faith and trust, by which alone its presence can be recog-
nized, and not by practical results and practical achievements.
Although this insistence on freedom and this hostility to all rules
and regulations, to all levelling tendencies, and to all compulsion
forms part of Luther’s character and temperament, it does not
become really intelligible until we see that his basic idea is that of
grace as the gift of God, which objectively precedes and implies
everything else, and that this Divine grace is only ohgcured by
human effort. Thus this stress upon free grace and human
impotence leads Luther into an emphasis upon spiritual freedom
and abandonment, which merges almost imperceptibly into a kind
of Quietism. The active and legal spirit of Calvinism is based
219 See p. 838.
D
VOL. u.
498 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
upon a different idea of grace and of the Church ; this helps us to
discern the peculiar nature of Lutheran freedom. Essentially it is
based upon the fact that the Church possesses the grace of God,
whicff makes everything else superfluous. It is, of course, true
that Luther believed that grace ought to bear fruit in a genuine
Christian piety expressed in daily life, but he taught that Divine
grace is in no way dependent upon this result, and that in general,
owing to the sinfulness of mankind, it is only very imperfectly
realized . 220
This now brings us to his second main reason. Original sin is
only overcome by faith in the grace of God and in the forgiveness
of sins ; again and again, however, it attacks the soul which is in
a state of grace, but, in spite of this, sin cannot destroy the state of
grace if the soul abides steadfast in faith. In Luther’s opinion, to
make radical Christianity the standard of the Christian state of
grace and of the Christian fellowship would be to dream of a
perfection which is seldom or never found, even among the finest
Christians, and which the majority do not even imagine. If we
must talk of Christian perfection at all, it consists in faith and
trust, in the acceptance of an individual by God, not in an active
fulfilment of the Christian ideal. Upon earth this is impossible,
and it will only be realized in the future life. Thus the Lutheran
conception of grace and the impossibility of overcoming sin
render it impossible to draw any external line of demarcation
between perfect and imperfect Christians; and the bond of
Christian union does not lie in the realm of practical achievement
at all, but in the objective possession of grace guaranteed and
preached by the Church. This ideal persists, even when in actual
life the Church contains Christians at very different stages of
experience, as well as souls which fall grievously into sin. Luther
insists that Christianity consists in this objective possession of
grace alone, and not in any kind of subjective achievement,
although to some extent faith should always issue in works. The
extent to which this takes place, however, affects neither the
quality of Christian piety nor the fact of personal salvation . 221
This brings us directly to the third reason. Luther believed that
any attempt to estimate the “state of grace” in individuals by the
standard ^of radical Christianity would lead to the making of
distinctions and divisions among Christians, to self-made agita-
tions and sects. The result of this would be to break the unity of
the Body of Christ, which would result in the pride of the
sectarians and the lovelessness of separation. Imperfection and sin
880 See p. 839. 881 See p. 840.
PROTESTANTISM
499
within the Church should be overcome rather by mutual instruc-
tion and love and wise admonitions. This point of view implies
the unity of the Corpus Christianum — a unity which ought never to
be deliberately broken, but which should be maintained rather
by the spirit of love and service. Within this unity of the Body of
Christ even coarse and open sinners and non-Christians ought to
be tolerated, at least outwardly (for it is never possible to decide
quite positively about the real Christianity of any individual),
and, further, the primitive masses of the people ought to be kept,
at least outwardly, under the control of the Christian way of life,
partly as a means of preparatory discipline and education, and
partly with the aim of repressing — at least outwardly — external
evil behaviour. Grace must not renounce faith in mankind too
quickly, but it must gradually permeate a whole people, and
for the sake of the religious element in the nation, society must
restrain the activities of open sinners . 222
At this point, however, a whole host of other reasons appear
which explain why Luther rejected “sectarian” views. These
reasons are not directly connected with the idea of grace. As a
matter of course Luther regarded secular institutions and natural
possessions as appointed and ordained by God. Nature and the
life of the senses, a humanity almost entirely dependent upon
mutual help and organization, government and property, law
and oath, war and violence — all is willed by God ; therefore this
social order has its good side ; so far as the rest is concerned it is
an inevitable state of affairs, and is necessary, owing to the
presence of sin, as the arena in which the conflict with evil must
be fought. The Christian, therefore, is not set in the midst of a
social order controlled solely by the radical Christian ethic of the
Sermon on the Mount, nor by the mysticism which preaches self-
denial and detachment from the world. As an individual, of
course, in questions of personal piety and in the sphere of purely
personal relationships, the Christian is bound to try to obey this
higher law. But the Christian also belongs to the secular order of
Nature and of reason. This natural order has been, in part,
directly instituted by God, and in part it is indirectly permitted
to exist by Him. It serves the end of material well-being as well
as that of repression of evil; the Christian, therefore^ ought to
submit to it in so far as this does not require him to deny the
pure doctrine. This means, however, that for fallen humanity the
Christian ethic is a dualism : on the one hand, it isja pure and
radical Christian ethic, a personal ethic which is mainly con-
* aa See p. 840.
500 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
cerned with the preservation of the Christian spirit and temper ; on
the other hand, it is “natural 55 — governed by reason — and there-
fore only relatively Christian, that is, it is an official morality
appointed and permitted by God. This view of the natural order
means that the Christian may and should use law and compulsion,
swear in courts of law, take part in divorce proceedings, strive to
acquire wealth, property, whenever such action is required by
his official or social position, or by the demands of the State or of
the civil order — in fact, whenever it is necessary for any cause
whatsoever; the individual, however, the “spiritual 55 Christian,
on the other hand, must ignore everything of that kind ; in utter
love he must be the servant of all, to the entire exclusion of all
personal interests.
In his Sermon on Good Works , and also in the treatise addressed
To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation , in spite of all his
mystical spirituality and the radical emphasis upon love in his
ethic, Luther had no difficulty in immediately outlining a pro-
gramme of Christian social reform and of a Christian world order,
in a spirit which accepts the life of the world from a very broad
point of view. In this programme Luther was thinking mainly of
external Christendom, of the Christian as a citizen and a member
of the State, of the Corpus Christianum or the Christian Society,
within which, however, the only real and spiritual Christianity is
the Christianity of the individual and of the spirit. To what a
limited extent, however, these two aspects coincided is revealed
by the fact that during the early years of experiment and re-
organization Luther would have liked to see some outward
institution representing the true Christians who formed the
smaller groups within the Church . 223
To some extent there is a familiar ring about these ideas of
Luther. This is due to their presence in the earlier Christian ethic,
and the fact that they are here gathered up into one central
thought, which is regarded as self-evident, is not difficult to under-
stand when we remember the analogous patristic and mediaeval
developments. This self-evident idea which is here predominant
is precisely that conception of the Church which implies that
Christian piety and holiness do not consist in the subjective
achievement and activity of individuals, but in the objective
Divine nature of the wealth of grace which belongs to the institu-
tion as such. This idea of the Church also contains these further
elements : the universality of the Church, which includes the most
varied degrees of the practical realization of the ideal ; its system
828 See p. 840.
PROTESTANTISM
501
of religious instruction which aims at educating all who have been
baptized with the aim of full Christian maturity ; its acceptance
as a logical result of this universality, of secular, political, and social
institutions, as institutions which have been founded by natural
Divine Reason as they had to be developed within fallen human-
ity; this is why these institutions should and must represent a
relative contrast to the radical ethic of the Sermon on the Mount,
with which, however, by means of the Decalogue, a final unity is
attained.
Since, however, Luther’s arguments are based on fresh assump-
tions, they naturally carry a different meaning from that of
analogous statements by Catholic theologians. The objective
holiness which constitutes the status of the Christian, which
relieves the individual of the impossible obligation of even
attempting the full realization of the Christian ideal, is not the
concrete holiness of the institution, of the priesthood, of the
sacraments, in which it is possible to participate by entering into
the ritual of public worship. In the Lutheran view this objective
holiness consists simply in the Word of the forgiveness of sins,
which broods above all sin and imperfection as a consoling and
joy-bringing energy ; the soul can only enter into this state through
a full personal faith, born of repentance, which alone makes the
Christian community holy and well-pleasing to God, in spite of
their sins and their permanent imperfections; it is a purely
objective treasure, and as such it is absolute, even though it can
only be appropriated in the spirit of entire surrender.
The Word of the forgiveness of sins, however, is the super-
natural agent which creates the Church ; it is the treasure which
has been established by God ; it constitutes both her essence and
the treasure which she has to administer; it forms the heart of
the institution, from which to all who surrender themselves to it
in faith, in spite of all unequal achievement, there radiates the
glory of an entirely equal reconciling light which makes everyone
well-pleasing in the sight of God.
Characteristics peculiar to
the Protestant Ethic
In accordance with this point of view, therefore* Luther’s
conception of the universality of this ecclesiastical ethic is also
different. It does not mean an ordered “scale of perfection” with
its various degrees of holiness, combined with the permission of a
dualistic morality to various groups within the Church. It implies
rather that the same ethical claim is made on all the members
502 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
of the Church, combined with the belief that no one can attain
an active perfection. It requires “faith” from everyone, and this
ought to be made possible, or at least accessible, to everyone,
through baptism and the proclamation of the Gospel in the
ministry of the Word. But this demand is combined with a tolerant
recognition of the varied effects of faith, due to the feeling that
since it is impossible to overcome sin, and since the only thing
that really matters is faith in the forgiveness of sins, the various
differences in the exercise of faith really do not matter at all in
essentials. The Lutheran ecclesiastical ethic does not imply a
lowering of the Christian ideal; its real significance consists in
this: that the central importance of practical achievement in
general is replaced by the supreme decisive power of a personal
“heart-faith” in the forgiveness of sins. It is no longer a service
based on “good works”, rendered in an anxious or scrupulous
spirit, nor a sharing out of “merits” among different classes of
people; it is not the compensation for the concrete institutional
holiness by the strenuous endeavour to produce “good works”,
nor, on the other hand, is it the quantitative grading of the idea
of perfection, nor does it mean that the ideal is maintained in
theory while the attempt to realize it in practice is renounced.
The meaning of this Lutheran ethic is rather that all kinds of
degrees and stages of Christian development are tolerated for
their own sake, because ultimately they do not really matter at
all, since everything that does matter is focused in the grace of
the forgiveness of sins, and in the blessedness of those who have
been justified by faith. The universalism of the Church now
means a system of religious education, which includes everyone
through the preaching of the Word, and a passive quietistic
attitude towards the relics of sin, combined with the hope that
the power which proceeds from grace will of itself ever afresh in
some measure overcome these sinful tendencies, and that the
earthly conflict will be followed by a heavenly victory.
The third characteristic of the Lutheran ethic, therefore — the
acceptance of the secular institutions of reason — of law, might,
compulsion, and property — which is connected with that univers-
ality which tolerates the non-realization of the Christian ideal,
is also interpreted in a fresh way. It must be admitted, however,
that in the main Luther here carries forward the Catholic ecclesi-
astical idea of a Christian unity of civilization as something which
is absolutely natural and obvious.
But this acceptance of the natural order is now no longer inter-
preted in the mediaeval sense, in which the natural order and all
PROTESTANTISM
503
its institutions are placed under the control of the Church, in
order to serve the purpose of life in the supernatural order. In the
Lutheran ethic these secular institutions become pure forms and
presuppositions; in themselves they have no meaning. Luther’s
view is that these institutions have either been appointed by God
directly, or by reason, indirectly — that therefore they are implied
in the creative order of reason and the Divine Law ; it is, therefore,
the duty of a Christian to accept them just as he accepts sun and
rain, storm and wind. This situation happens to be that which
has been definitely appointed as the one within which Christian
love ought to be exercised, and Christians have no right to leave
this sphere for self-chosen conditions of life. The right attitude
towards them, therefore, is not the acceptance of the natural
order as of a lower stage of development, regulated by the higher
standpoint of the purpose of the Church and the community, but
it is that of obedience to conditions of life willed by God, which
provide natural opportunities for exercising the Christian spirit
of love. The intramundane political and social ethic has thus been
changed from a doctrine of relative ethical values which have
to be subordinated to the supreme aim of Supernature, into a
doctrine of forms and presuppositions of the Christian way of
love appointed by God, which lie ready to hand in the ordered
and law-abiding life of the State, with its guild and class organ-
izations. These forms can be understood from the natural law of
morals, and their apparent inconsistency with the Christian ideal
can be explained by their adaptation to the conditions of fallen
humanity; the right attitude towards them, however, is not one
of explanation and ethical acceptance, but of religious obedience
and humble submission . 224
(I) Central Position of the Decalogue
This radical Christian ethic of the love of God, and of that
love of the brethren which flows from the love of God, was now
to constitute the ethic both of a national Church and of an
exclusively Christian Society. If this were to be realized, however,
the idea that a living faith would spontaneously generate a
spiritual and moral order was felt to be inadequate. Luther saw
that a definite moral rule of life must be established, a Christian
law of ethics, which could be held up to the masses as* an ideal,
which would also secure the very important factor of the incor-
poration of secular morality into the whole Christian order. In
order to do this Luther naturally turned to the Bible, in which it
224 See p. 843.
504 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
was quite evident that an expression of that fundamental Christian
impulse might be found. It is characteristic of Luther that he
found the objective revelation of the moral law which manifested
this inward impulse not in the Sermon on the Mount, but in the
Decalogue, which, again, in his mind, was identified with the
natural moral consciousness or the Natural Law, which has been
simply confirmed and interpreted by Jesus and the Apostles. It
was thus that the Decalogue developed its characteristic abso-
lute meaning within Protestantism, as the complete expression of
the Lex Naturae , and of the Protestant ethic with which it was
identified . 225
The Decalogue seemed suitable for this purpose, in part
because its significance within the whole of the previous tradition
had already developed along those lines ; in part, too, because it
was most useful in the instruction of catechumens, and also
because it formed part of revealed religion, and occupied a central
position in the Old and in the New Testament; above all, how-
ever, probably Luther seized on it instinctively because it pro-
vided the opportunity he sought for incorporating “this-world”
morality and “this- world” institutions into his whole ethical
scheme. The ethic of a universal Church, and the belief that sin
could never be overcome, which arose out of the Lutheran
emphasis upon the forgiveness of sins, could certainly not find its
watchword in the Sermon on the Mount; the Decalogue alone
could provide it. The national religious ethic of ancient Israel was
better suited to this purpose than the radicalism of the message
of Jesus, which was concerned solely with personal religion, and
in his later development of ethical theory Luther drew more and
more widely upon the moral teaching of the Old Testament
and the moral wisdom of the Jews . 226
The Decalogue thus became the substance of the Christian
moral law, and in so doing it also gained a new theological
meaning. The mediaeval ideal, which contained, on the one hand,
the Lex Naturae and its Christian expression in the Decalogue, and,
on the other, the higher theological virtues and the Evangelical
Counsels, has been abandoned. The Decalogue, combined with
the Lex Naturae , in its full original sense, is now steeped entirely
in Christian thought, and is proclaimed as wholly identical with
the fundamental Gospel law of love to God and man. Luther
claims that the Decalogue, rightly understood, is the complete
Christian ethical ideal. This is why he lays so much emphasis
upon the difference between the First and Second Tables of the
225 See p. 844. 226 See p. 847.
PROTESTANTISM
505
Law. The First Table, with its commandments which concern
man’s relationship to God, contains the fundamental demand for
reverence, love, and trust, which can only be fulfilled on the basis
of a believing assurance. It requires the right religious attitude,
the motus spirituales , and it constitutes the purely religious demand.
This claim, however, leads to the Second Table, with its demand
that our attitude towards our neighbour should be one which
expresses love, in a state of life which accepts the natural order as
something which God has ordained in order to provide a sphere
in which love can be exercised. This Second Table includes the
doctrine of the “Calling”, and of the teaching on adjustment to
existing conditions in the State and in Society, and the idea that
love is to be exercised not beyond but within the natural order of
human life. Obedience to the Second Table of the Decalogue,
however, only has a true ethical value when it issues from the
spiritual temper of faith, and when it aims at the exercise of a
living faith towards one’s neighbour, a gathering up of everything
in this one real supreme value of life. Hence the Decalogue and
the Natural Law, when they are fully understood, constitute the
pure Christian and spiritual ideal. Wherever the Decalogue and
the Natural Law are interpreted apart from these motives and
aims — as, indeed, pagans have done, and as unregenerate reason
still does to-day — neither of them has been fully understood. Thus
pagans, and those who have taught a remnant of the Lex Naturae ,
were really only acquainted with the Second Table of the Law;
they had forgotten the First Table. Their interpretation of the
Second Table was well expressed in positive law, especially in
Roman Law and in philosophical morality. 1 But, in spite of that,
Luther felt that such an interpretation only became useful when
it was inspired and vitalized by the right Christian and spiritual
temper — that is, with the spirit of the First Table, which in the
Primitive State was also the spirit of the Lex Naturae in its full
sense. Unless this is borne in mind this ethic is simply cold self-
righteousness and pagan self-love. Thus the scientific ethic of
Protestantism may expound the Lex Naturae according to the
Decalogue and according to Cicero and Aristotle, but it is only
a vital Christian piety which breathes into these forms that
inspiring and radiant spirit — maintained in the midst of trial and
sorrow and temptation — of gratitude and surrender to God which
is based upon the consolations of grace.
Thus, within the Protestant confessions, the development of a
right conception of the Decalogue became*a task of primary and
fundamental importance. The problem was to formulate a theory
506 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
in which the inner impulse of faith and the positive revelation of
the ideal should unite. Theologically, therefore, the chief problem
was to make a clear distinction between the First and Second
Tables of the Law, and yet to relate them to each other. This
involved the necessity for making a clear distinction between the
absolute Decalogue and the Law of Nature, (as it was in the
Primitive State and has been renewed by Christ) and the relative
interpretation of the Decalogue and of the Law of Nature (as it is
when the First Table is misinterpreted by the pagan philosophical
ethic, by jurisprudence and the natural conscience). In its absolute
form in the Primitive State, however, the essence of this moral
law simply meant the religious consecration of natural conditions
and natural duties, the permeation of nature with a spiritual
atmosphere ; indeed, the essence of the doctrine of the Primitive
State does not consist in the ascent from Nature to Supernature,
but in the perfection of man as a human being. Thus, in spite of
the fact that many earlier formulas and theories have been
retained, the Protestant ethic still forms a new interpretation of
the patristic and mediaeval equation of the Decalogue and the
Law of Nature — that is, it is a new conception of the Law of
Nature itself. This means that the Law of Nature is no longer
regarded as the radical expression of the idea of personality,
of equality, of community of property, of a life without compulsion
or law, but the inspiration of all natural and necessary activity
with the spirit of faith, since everything which is required by
Nature (which is itself of Divine appointment) can be combined
with the spirit of faith, with love to God and man.
Moreover, from a Natural Law of this kind it is manifestly
impossible to draw conclusions in favour of equality and com-
munism, not merely because in its present relative form it is
modified by the conditions of fallen humanity, but because, in its
very essence, it cannot produce such results. The observance of
this Natural Law simply means that the activity required by
natural circumstances and by Divine appointment is to be
impregnated with the religious spirit of trust in God and of
surrender to Him, and also that social behaviour is to be the
outcome of love, since social usefulness is emphasized for love’s
sake, and not simply for its utilitarian character.
(II) Dualism of this Ethic
At this point, however, the question arises : which conditions
are the product of Nature? So far as the undefined but painless
•and harmonious conditions in Paradise were concerned, there is
PROTESTANTISM
507
very little to say in answer to this question. It is obvious that at
that period both elements agreed with each other, and we do
not need to pursue this subject any farther. In any case, un-
bounded love and freedom from compulsion and pain prevailed.
But that which it was possible to unite under such circumstances
became, in the course of world-history, separated: the relative
Natural Law of the state of sin, which expresses itself in the
State, law, and dominion, was at variance with the religious ethic
of love, which renounces law, self-assertion, and the effort to
achieve its own ends. When, however, the Decalogue and the
Natural Law had been renewed and interpreted by Christ, the
purely religious aim of life and the purely religious fellowship of
love emerges as the real Christian ideal, an ideal which concerns
the inner life of the individual, along with the secular ethic of
professional life, the State, and Society, to which man belongs
either officially, or through being incorporated into the order of
Society and the State, with its marks of law and compulsion.
This is the difficult aspect of the Lutheran ethic. The patristic
and Thomist doctrine had been able to explain its dualistic
morality by interpreting the Law of Nature as an institution
which served both as the penalty and the remedy for sin ; upon
this basis of fallen humanity it then constructed the peculiarly
Christian order as a higher form of fellowship. When, however,
Luther took over this Catholic theory, he felt that it did not really
harmonize with his fundamental point of view ; for, although he
was prepared to admit that the natural order may have lost its
spiritual content through the Fall, he felt that actual opposition
between the two was impossible. Either there is no room for the
transformation of the Natural Law of Paradise into a largely
contradictory Natural Law of fallen humanity (and therefore for
the essential contrast between the Natural Law of Paradise and
the Natural Law of the present day) ; if so, then the present
Natural Law, and the political and social order which corresponds
to it, must be present in it or be transferred to it in a form which
is really in conformity with Christian thought. Or, the Natural
Law of Paradise has actually been transformed into an empirical
Natural Law which is strongly opposed to it ; if this is so, then its
institutions are not simply forms and presuppositions which can
be expanded by the Christian spirit and the spiritual love of God.
If the latter is the case, this gives rise to a very definite and clear
contradiction in thought. Since, then, Luther adopts this latter
point of view between his ideal of Natural Law and the Deca-
logue, or between his fundamental conception of the Christian
508 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
moral law and his really dualistic instructions to Christians
which decree an inward morality for the individual and an
external “official 55 morality, there exists an extremely painful
inconsistency. At this point in Luther’s doctrine there breaks out
once again the tension which is essential in every Christian
ethic — the tension between the Christian ethic and the world
and Nature which he had removed in his ideal of the Law.
This contradiction which Catholicism had turned into a
contrast between two stages — between the lower stage of develop-
ment of relative Natural Law and the genuinely Christian higher
stage of development — has here been transferred to the individual
as the contrast between “person 55 and “office 55 . Since, like the
Catholic theologians, Luther maintained the idea of grace and
of universality, and could not possibly have adopted the sectarian
attitude of world-denial, his ethic was also obliged to incorporate
into its theory the contrast between secular morality and the
morality of grace. The solution was provided, not as in the
mediaeval Church by apportioning responsibility among various
classes and groups, for mutual supplementation and vicarious
service, but by placing each individual in the midst of a dualistic
ethic ; this dualism is then explained as due in part to the ordering
and arrangement of God, in part to sin, and in part to the actual
conditions of physical existence.
As time went on, however, Luther modified this dualism a good
deal. Just as in his conception of the Church the earlier subjec-
tivity of his view gave place to the idea of the objectivity of the
institution, so also, and in close connection with this change of
view, in the sphere of ethics the opposition between a personal
and an official ethic, between the Sermon on the Mount and
Natural Law, was increasingly modified. More and more he came
to regard secular institutions as mere forms of life, which are due
less to the relative tendency of sin than to the positive institution
and appointment of God, and the general assumptions arising
out of Natural Law . 227 Finally, the Protestant ethic finds it once
more possible to use the ethics of Aristotle, Cicero, and the Stoics,
and the ancient Humanistic ideas of politics, economics, and
social doctrine. These ideas provide material which, lacking the
religious motive, in themselves do not yet constitute an ethic at
all ; as the results of Natural Law, however, they only need to
be penetrated by the religious principle which was originally
contained in the Natural Law, in order to become a Christian
ethic. More and more the contrast between a Christianity of
227 See p. 847.
PROTESTANTISM
509
disposition and the secular official morality disappears; and the
sense of tension and contrast gives place to an attempt to construct
a synthesis. Existing conditions, which are permanent either
because they are founded on reason or appointed by God, become
more and more the normal condition, and the Christian ethic
becomes, as modern Lutherans say increasingly, “the truth of
the natural order”, the work of Redemption consists more and
more in the “glorification of the natural order created by God,
and not in a species of destruction of that which God has
created” ; 228 also, one might add, not merely in a patient endurance
of the natural order, but in a humble and obedient acceptance of
it. “Nature”, that is, the political and social order which has been
evolved by the Law of Nature, is conceived as a stable order of
Society, existing for one purpose, which is required by reason in the
sense of the territorial state ; and the religious sentiment regards
it less and less as an opposition to the radical ethic of love, but
rather as an institution which has been founded and decreed by
God, and which therefore has to be obeyed. In place of the earlier
and more spiritual point of view, in which Luther formulated the
purpose of life from the point of view of the absolute religious end,
and of the opposition to the world to which that gave rise, Luther
insisted more and more upon the necessity for obedience to
positive authority. As faith was replaced by dogma, so, instead of
the justitia spirituals of the individual which was opposed to the
relative Natural Law of the “official” ethic, he emphasized
obedience to the ordinances of God and to the world conditions
which He has appointed. The relative order of reason, tainted
by sin, becomes the authoritative, entirely positive order of
reality, to which, without thinking very much about it, the
Christian has to adapt himself. This is how the problem of the
inconsistency of the Lutheran ethic has been overcome . 229 The
radical ethic of love disappears, and the ethic of obedience
towards authority comes into prominence. Increasingly the
Lutheran ethic is summed up in the following characteristic
features: confidence in God founded on His grace, and love of
one’s neighbour which is exercised in the social duties of one’s
228 Cf. Luthardt: Kompendium 10, Thieme IV; most decisively in Uhlhorn: Kath.
u. Prot.,p. 2Q: “With that the dualism of the present and the future life, of the
natural and the supernatural, of Christian and worldly, of the perfect Christian
and the average Christian, has been overcome. Science, trade, and commerce
gain once more their free movement. Therefore Uhlhorn thinks that Protestantism
will be able to solve the social question” for which Catholicism is inwardly
incapable and only externally concerned.
229 See p. 848.
5 io THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
calling, combined with an obedient surrender to the order of
Society created by the Law of Nature.
Thus the deep inner tensions of the Christian ethic, which had
always appeared whenever a fresh attempt was made to shape
the life of the world according to the Christian standard, were
also retained in the ethical theory of the Reformation. This
ethic also is a compromise, a dualistic morality, above all
in the fundamental conception of Luther. Only the incon-
sistencies are not distributed among various grades, but are
interwoven in such a way that they form a dualistic attitude
towards life in each individual. The compromise has become a
more interior thing, and in the process it has become increasingly
modified, since the world is accepted not so much as a sinful
institution or as an order which, through sin, has obscured the
light of reason, but as a direct and positive appointment by God.
The happy and docile humility which accepts the grace of the
forgiveness of sins increasingly resembles the humility which
accepts the conditions appointed by God; the converse is also
true ; therefore on both sides the religious attitude becomes similar.
The thread of pure idealism, however, constantly reappears. For
as soon as the ideal of the Sermon on the Mount reveals the deep
cleavage between existing conditions and the genuine Christian
ideal, and as soon as the existing social and political order fails
to harmonize with the Church and the Word of God, a spirit of
violent anger breaks out against the world of sin and of the Devil —
the Last Judgment becomes a desirable end of all things, and the
! Christian life seems essentially to be a life “under the Cross” and
; the hope of a blessed life beyond death. Joyful acceptance of the
1 world then becomes patient endurance of the world, and Luther-
j anism, in particular, oscillates between these two extremes.
( From another point of view, however, the same problem
4 reappears. If the spiritualizing of the Decalogue is taken seriously,
if all that is done in the earthly secular sphere is really regarded
purely from the standpoint of the love of God and as an obvious
duty, and if it is precisely in the presence of this motive that the
Christian nature of morality is seen, then secular institutions sink
to the level of merely concrete conditions; they become forms
which are in themselves valueless, within which it is the Christian’s
duty to live as though the world did not exist at all. The reduction
of the world to mere form and presupposition is just as' much an
acceptance of the world on the one hand as it is a depreciation of
it on the other. The outlook on the world, however, then becomes
880 See p. 849,
PROTESTANTISM
5*1
ascetic, in the sense that men believe that secular institutions and
values possess no independent purpose of their own, nor an inner
Divine element. They become purely positive institutions and
facts, which only proceed from the Will of God, not from inner
necessity. They become entirely formal and hollow, and the
endurance of them becomes an act of p ure obedience and patience.
Within this sphere, however, the world is not accepted, but it is
regarded as a matter of indifference and overcome. Here, there-
fore, asceticism, as depreciation of the world, is no longer (as in
Catholicism) merely connected with individual achievements,
but it permeates the whole fabric of life and its activity, leaving
behind nothing save the expectation of the much desired Last
Day, which will set the soul free from those conditions of life
which have never quite squared with the Christian ideal, most of
which are still wholly perverted by sin. The one thing that is
forbidden, however, is the effort to free oneself from these condi-
tions, as is done in monasticism. Instead, the spirit of world-
renunciation is to be carried into the natural course of daily life
within the world itself. This view also contains some expressions
of a real love to the world and to Nature (which, indeed, in them-
selves are good and have only been spoilt by sin), and now and
again the whole ethic can even appear as a religious glorification
and penetration of Nature. This only means, however, that the
deep inner inconsistency, the deep inner tension, which lies in
the whole problem, still remains ; it shows that the compromise
undertaken by Catholicism has only been removed to a different
plane ; it has sunk deeper into the inward depths of life, but it is
still a compromise. It is the compromise (required by practical
life, inevitable in the universality of Christian fellowship, made
possible by the transferring of holiness from the activity of the
individual into the objective ecclesiastical possession of grace) be-
tween a purely religious ethic and the claims of the life of the world.
INTROSPECT AND "FORECAST
If we summarize all these considerations, and look back at the
presentation of our subject in the Middle Ages and in the Early
Church, we can then say: Protestantism carries forward the
acceptance of the life of the world into the ethic of a universal
Christian Society, which had been dimly foreshadowed in late
antiquity, but which was only really attained in the Middle
Ages, and it intensifies this principle to the highest possible
degree. Since Protestantism is a renewal of the primitive Christian
religious spirit, its greatest difficulty arose, primarily, at this
512 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
point. In the endeavour to deal with this problem through the
formation of small communities within external Christendom,
and in the distinction it draws between the personal spiritual
ethic and secular official morality, it approaches the sect-type,
which also in reality springs out of Protestantism at this point.
Since, however, on the other hand, Protestantism maintains the
ideal of a pure institution of grace which comprehends the whole
of Society, and the unity of the Christian Society, it rejects the
sect-type as the tendency towards legalism and loveless division.
This rejection of the sect-type led Protestantism to an ever-
increasing recognition of the life of the world and of the morality
of the world. Just as in Thomism the contrast between the relative
Lex Naturae and the ethic of grace gradually disappeared, till it
became a lower stage in the ethic of grace, so here the Lex Naturae
becomes increasingly a mere form, which the Christian spirit
inspires with the glow of religious love and energy, making it the
presupposition of its activity. In close connection with the develop-
ment of the Church as the organ of grace into a unity of life
dominating the State and Society as a whole, ethics also are
developed into a Christian inspiration of life, into the “classes
and callings” ordained by God, and therefore holy, which,
further, are given with the Natural Law, and to a great extent, in
the Old Testament, have been directly appointed or confirmed
by God, and have not been rescinded by the New Testament.
The idea of Grace as the perfection and superstructure of Nature
may be due to Catholic influence, but the permeation of the
existing forms of life with the spirit of faith and love is a Protestant
conception. While Catholicism distributes the ethical claim among
various classes of people, Protestantism demands the same moral
standard from all alike. While Catholicism asserts the possibility
of attaining absolute holiness, and therefore maintains special
groups for the cultivation of the higher Christian piety, Protestant-
ism proclaims the impossibility of overcoming sin for all alike,
and gives to all as a common spring of morals the believing
disposition, which can be preserved, even despite the outward
conditions of life, granted that complete holiness is impossible to
attain. Protestantism usually claims that in relation to the problem
of “Christianity and Civilization”, which Catholicism and thesects
in their own way have both solved along the lines of asceticism
and legalism (in Catholicism by reorganizing" and secularizing the
life of the world, in the sects by the rejection of the world and
therefore as a definite rigid asceticism, and in both instances as
law), it has maintained the inwardness of Christianity freed from
PROTESTANTISM
5i3
all legalism, and that it has thus made it possible for the life of
the world to be freely penetrated with the Christian spirit.
Compared with the solution provided by Catholicism and the
sects this is only, to a very limited extent, a new solution of the
problem. The principle of pure spiritual freedom, which Protes-
tantism certainly did restore, is still in its content a principle which
is closely connected with the Bible, and in this respect it comes
very near to the ethic of the sect-type, with its general rejection
of law, might, the State, force, and self-interest ; while the extension
of this spirit by means of a Church, as the organ of redemption,
controlling a united Christian Society, approximates very closely
to the ethic of the Catholic Church-type. The Protestant solution
of the difficulty in the dualistic ethic of a “personal” and an
“official” kind is no solution; it is simply a new formulation of
the problem, and even in Protestantism the problem has some-
times been made superficial by reducing it to the legalism of a
secular and Christian ethic deduced simply from the authority of
the Bible. This development has sometimes taken place not only
in Calvinism, but also in Lutheranism ; it has only been empha-
sized more strongly in Calvinism because that denomination
generally lays greater stress on the ethical organization of the
Church . 2303
These similarities and differences between Protestantism and
mediaeval Catholicism produced, therefore, on both sides similari-
ties and differences in their social philosophy.
Protestant social philosophy carried forward the patristic and
Catholic intellectual point of view based on Natural Law with
its close relation to the Christian ideal, but it gave to the relation-
ship and the constitution of both a new meaning. Since, however,
the tension between both these elements had only changed its
position, it also reappears, in an altered form, in the social
philosophy of Protestantism. From this point of view also the
same process is repeated with reference to the sect-type. The
similarity between Protestantism and the sect-type lies in the
emphasis upon the Christian demand as a strict and equal demand
upon all men, and thus on Christian individualism. Protestantism,
however, always deduces this individualism solely from the
influence of the Church as the organ of redeeming grace, and in
this way it places the individual in connection with the general
cultural life by which it is surrounded. Hence, in spite of its indi-
vidualism, the social teaching of Protestantism is much nearer to
Catholic social doctrine than to that of the sect-type.
* 30a See p. 849.
£
VOL. II.
514 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
At this point at last we have before us the presuppositions which
are necessary for the understanding of Protestant social philosophy.
From this point of view we can clearly distinguish the essential
difference between it and Catholic social philosophy, as well as
its attitude towards Christian radicalism, which, as a complemen-
tary movement, was produced just as much by Protestantism as
it was by Catholicism.
In the following sections, therefore, I shall present the social
philosophy of Lutheranism which has developed, fairly logically,
out of these basic ideas. I shall then present a study of the social
philosophy of Calvinism, which introduced considerable modifi-
cations into the common stock of the intellectual heritage. The
first point to be considered in connection with both confessions
will be the conception of the Church, and the way in which it
secured the universality and dominion of the Church. The next
point will be the ecclesiastical ethic, and the way in which secular
culture and secular-social values were incorporated into this
ecclesiastical ethic. Since in thus gathering the whole of life under
the dominion of the idea of the Church there is implied, con-
sciously or unconsciously, the ideal of a sociological fundamental
theory which embraces all these formations, we shall deal further
with the sociological fundamental theory which was dominant at
that time. Only upon this basis will it then be possible to answer
the last question about the particular forms adopted by the main
social phenomena in the Family, the State, and Society.
Confessional Lutheranism and Calvinism, however, were not
the only products of the Lutheran movement. Alongside of these
movements which belonged to the Church-type there arose out
of them other movements which burst through the Church-type
and, more or less logically, developed the sect-type. From this
type there extends a whole unbroken chain of complementary
movements, extending from the Anabaptists and all “spiritual
reformers” to the Independents, Pietists, and the modern sects.
These complementary movements, as has been shown several
times already, were a logical development of Luther’s world of
thought, as soon as its presupposition — the idea of the Church —
was broken through; Luther himself, in his “group” ideal and in
the radical mysticism of his ethical ideas, in spite of the fact that
inwardly he was far from the sect-type, came very near to the
ideals of these movements; indeed, he only missed them by a
hair’s breadth. Only in the light of the contrast which these move-
ments present can we fully understand ecclesiastical Protestantism.
Further, since these movements broke away from the main body
PROTESTANTISM
5i5
which supported the Reformation, they have had an amazingly
strong reflex action upon orthodox Protestantism. The effect on
Lutheranism was manifest: as it watched the development of
these sect-movements it realized the danger of subjectivism, and
it reacted violently in the direction of objectivity. Calvinism was
influenced by these movements in the sense that it accepted to a
great extent their ideal of holiness, and in so doing ultimately
made a breach in its national and State Church system. Apart
from their influence upon the two leading Protestant confessions,
these movements are of universal significance in world-history,
since in their various ramifications they produced results which
led to and fostered religious subjectivism in general, separation
between Church and State, the independence of local congrega-
tions, and finally of the individual, thus bringing a whole host of
religious motives into the subjectivism of the Enlightenment.
Thus in the last section we shall still have to deal with the sect-
type within the sphere of Protestantism.
2. LUTHERANISM
The Ecclesiastical Organization of Lutheranism
The whole social fabric of Lutheranism — that is, of those
ecclesiastical and cultural organizations which were the direct
logical result of Lutheran ideas — was erected upon the basis of
the thought of Luther’s later period, the period, that is, when he
had deliberately decided in favour of the Territorial Church
system. This Lutheran system, however, did not spread very far
beyond its original home; its chief expansion took place in the
German territorial States, in Scandinavia, and in the Baltic
States. On the Western frontier of Germany it lost large sections
to Calvinism. In France, England, Holland, and Scotland it
succumbed before more active and progressive ecclesiastical
movements of a very different kind. In the South and East its
progress was checked by the Counter-Reformation within the
Roman Church, which fused Thomism and the Renaissance in
a new combination ; the result was, that for some time to come,
in many respects the Roman Church once more became superior
to Lutheranism in the social and cultural sphere.
Lutheranism was based entirely upon the idea of an ecclesias-
tical civilization, forcibly dominated by religious ideas. This was
actually the case, in spite of the fact that in theory the Lutheran
system regarded the civil and the spiritual authority as entirely
516 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
independent of each other, and in spite of the fact that the
Catholic supremacy of an international, hierarchical Church,
enforced by directly ecclesiastical methods, had been discarded.
Thus the conception of a State Church still remains the centre
of the social doctrines of Lutheranism, and all social developments
which take place outside the religious sphere are estimated from
the point of view of the result of their incorporation into the ideal
of a social order composed of a unified State penetrated by the
Church with the ultimate aims of religion. In Lutheranism this
idea was not simply part of its religious and ethical ideal ; it was
essential to its very existence. Lutheranism realized that it could
not stand alone; it was like some frail sapling which needed the
robust support of a Christian State or a Christian Society if its
pure spirituality were ever to bear good fruit.
The centre of the whole system, therefore, was the specifically
Lutheran conception of the Church, and in this matter the
theoretical religious and dogmatic view of the Church, from its
own standpoint, was of fundamental importance . 231
This conception contains two main elements which control the
Lutheran view as a whole : ( i ) The idea of the Church has been
greatly spiritualized ; this was Luther’s intention, and in the main
the Lutheran theologians maintained this point of view during
the classic period of orthodox Lutheranism. (2) This entirely
spiritualized Church, which does not desire any human organ of
compulsion for the enforcement of the pure doctrine, and which
neither is able nor desires to carry out its work of Church discipline
by any external method of compulsion which can be legally
formulated, is, in spite of that, based entirely and wholly upon
the idea of a fixed and rigid system of doctrine to which all
consent, which alone has the power, in its purity and exclusive-
ness, to secure redemption from sin and from hell. This means
that, in spite of her spiritual character, and in spite of her renuncia-
tion of the methods of law and compulsion as natural rights, the
Church is still obliged to submit unconditionally to the external
life of the political sphere which she dominates. Inconsistencies of
this kind had existed within every previous theory of the Christian
Church, but the tension which they caused never became so
acute as in Lutheranism, and their mutual hostility has had a
paralysing effect upon the whole course of Lutheran development.
The idealistic aspect of this conception of the Church, which
introduces an entirely new element into the history of the Christian
idea of the Church, thus becomes manifest. The Word of God as
* S1 Sec p. 850.
PROTESTANTISM
5i7
the herald of the pure doctrine of that grace which forgives sins
and renews men’s souls brings everything to pass purely in its
own strength, by virtue of its inward miraculous power in assur-
ance of faith. The inward witness of experience proves its unique
Divine inspiration, which to an increasing extent is expanded
until it covers the whole content of Scripture, even including the
literal translation of the text and questions of punctuation. The
Scriptures, therefore, are the sole absolute authority, the standard
by which the Church is guided, in which Christ Himself is at
work, and alongside of which there is no need for any human
tradition, infallible ministry, priesthood, or hierarchy. The Bible
is its own interpreter, since it illuminates obscure passages by the
standard of those which are clear, and through the power of
the indwelling Holy Spirit it effects an entirely uniform objective
creed ; these norms, which the Bible itself has created by its own
method of interpretation, are fixed in the Creeds.
The Word, or the Christ who is active in and through the Word,
completes the work of the sermon and the sacraments; the
ordained minister is only the channel of the Word, and through
the pure doctrine it is Christ Himself who speaks, preaches, and
judges in him. The Word, or Christ in the Word, imparts faith,
love, and obedience, by means of which all submit to the truth of
the Scriptures, listen willingly to the preachers, who by spiritual
gifts and training for their calling have been fitted to proclaim
the Word; the faithful also willingly endure the chastisement of
the Church. Thus through the Scriptures Christ rules the Church ;
in Him resides the supreme redeeming power; it is He who
operates in the sacraments, who controls the exercise of ecclesias-
tical jurisdiction, who is the formative, controlling decisive
authority in the Church ; He achieves purely by His own spiritual
influence all that the Papacy, the priesthood, and the hierarchy,
Roman law and Roman compulsion, had achieved by external
human methods. The government, the supreme court of appeal,
and the executive power do not lie within the hands of the faithful
as a community of believers, since this community is indeed only
a product of the Scriptures and of the “pure doctrine” ; neither
does this power reside in the clergy, who are only the appointed
channels through which the Scriptures operate along their own
lines ; nor does it reside in the Prince, who is only a servant of
the sanctuary, and who only places his services at the disposal
of the self-propagation of the Word. No ; this authority is centred
solely in the Church of the Word itself, built up upon the miracle
of Scripture, whose miraculous powers only need to be given
518 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
a free course in order to allow this Church of the Word and
Christ Himself finally to produce all the results required. If
from the Catholic point of view the Papacy is the extension of
the Incarnation of Christ, the living authority in doctrine and
in jurisdiction, in Lutheranism the same thought is represented
by the Word, through which, as in a living being capable of
action, Christ Himself is directly operative . 232
In practice, of course, it was impossible to carry out this
extremely “spiritual” conception of the Church, with its miracu-
lous faith which staked everything on the power of the Word.
In reality, this idea of the uniform influence of the Word, over-
coming all difficulties and bringing order out of chaos, stood in
dire need of human support. The uniform interpretation of Scrip-
ture did not come about naturally; it had to be enforced from
above. The institution of ministers in an orderly way did not
come about spontaneously, neither through an outpouring of
charismatic gifts nor through the voluntary exercise of love and
willing submission to a charismatic ministry; a definite church-
order had to be created in order to call ministers and to give them
official recognition. Excommunication could not be carried out
by expecting defaulters to submit to the jurisdiction of the Church
of their own free will, but it needed the help of the State and the
imposition of civil penalties for spiritual transgressions.
In addition, the whole ecclesiastical organization needed to
be regulated on the financial, administrative, and mechanical
side, and the purely spiritual form of Church government through
the Word made no provision for this side of the life of the Church
at all, nor for the fact that the Church was involved in questions
of civil rights and the marriage law. Not only did the purely
“spiritual” Church of the Word possess no organ by which this
business could be transacted; more important still was the fact
that it possessed no inward, inevitable Divinely authorized system
of regulation. Thus the Church was obliged to hand these matters
over to other courts, since it regarded them as purely external
and mechanical, of purely human interest, trusting that these
courts, led by the Divine Spirit, would settle these questions as
wisely as they could from a purely human point of view. Thus it
came about that it was only the ruling Prince — the political
authority — who, in any case, was occupied with matters of
organization and administration through his official position,
and who, as the most important member of the Church, as the
membrum praecipuum , had the duty of rendering this service to the
131 See p. 851.
PROTESTANTISM 519
Church. To that, of course, there were added arguments based
on Natural Law. The Government protects the Natural Law
(which is regarded as identical with the Decalogue), and as a
Christian Government it has to maintain this Natural Law in
its full sense, since it also includes the First Table, which requires
the true worship and the pure fear of God. Thus as custos utriusque
tabulae it is also bound by Natural Law to support public worship,
the pure doctrine, and the ecclesiastical jurisdiction . 233
Thus it came to pass — at first as far as possible in the spirit
which Luther intended — that the purely spiritual church-order
was supplemented by a purely secular order of law and
authority, which, by means of the compulsory secular methods
of the brachium saeculare is able to exercise that authority which
the Church, as a purely spiritual institution of love and freedom,
neither can nor desires to procure by coercion. A legal compulsory
church-system has been established. But the element of compul-
sion is not exercised by the Church, but — in accordance with its
inferior status — by the State. The fact that all this takes place in
the civil sphere, and under the aegis of the secular authority, saves
appearances for the Church as a spiritual body which is con-
trolled by love; actually, however, the effect is the same, for in
the majority of cases the secular power only acts upon information
and suggestions given by the spiritual authority through the
pastors . 234 In practice the whole procedure was very cumbrous.
Thus, although it meant a departure from the pure Lutheran
theory, in order to simplify matters it was ultimately found
necessary to create the consistories, which were ecclesiastical
organs of government, ordered by the ruling Prince, which, with
the co-operation of ministers and lawyers, governed the Church
directly and forcibly, and which could directly decree and
impose fines, imprisonment, and corporal punishment, who thus
in the Church and for the Church introduced a system of govern-
ment based on penalties and compulsion in order to uphold
purity of doctrine and Christian behaviour . 236
Thus that very element which from the theoretical and religious
point of view was regarded merely as a human insignificant
side-issue within the fabric of a Church, which was essentially
based upon supernatural powers, became in practice, as we can
well understand, the main issue.
The ruling Princes created doctrinal uniformity, and imposed
*** For the theory of the membrum praecipuum ( Sohm , pp. 553-573) is excellent
and clear; for the custodia utriusque tabulae , Sohm , pp. 549-553
m Sec p.851. ' See p.851.
520 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the Symbolical books upon the Protestant (Lutheran) Church
by force.
They created State Church councils which undertook the work
of administration and of Church courts with the aid of the pastors.
They placed questions of Christian faith and morals under
secular control, and spiritual procedure and penalties were
followed by civil legal consequences. In theory, the Church was
ruled by Christ and by the Word ; in practice it was governed
by the ruling Princes and the pastors. At the outset, however,
this whole system of church-order was something quite human,
fluctuating and casual. But when its importance for the whole
development of the Church became apparent, to some extent at
least, even if only indirectly, the system itself came to be regarded
as of Divine appointment. It even came to be linked up with the
system of doctrine, for as the proclamation of the Word required
an organized ministry, and this ministry was appointed by God
Himself in Christ, an organized official ministry became necessary
from the doctrinal standpoint. For even when a man who has the
requisite spiritual gifts makes the decision to enter the ministry
on the strength of an inward Divine “call”, he cannot obey this
call outwardly unless an official ministry instituted by God does
exist, a ministry which is carried on in an ordered succession.
Thus even in Protestantism there remains a jus divinum , even
though it be only a poor apology for the real thing : that is, the
necessity for an official ministry is recognized, together with the
further implication that a man who is called to the ministry
should receive his official appointment in an ordered way. This
inevitably involves a church-order jure divino , so far as the exist-
ence of the ministry in general and a regular procedure for
induction to office is concerned. The way in which this is to be
carried out is merely a matter of convenience. It is de jure divino
that at least there should be a church law regulating this point
at all. The secular law itself, which arises out of the church law,
is a purely human institution. The fact is Divine, the method
human. Further, the sanctity of the church-order only extends
to the appointment to the ministry of the Word, but it does not
affect the other technical duties which form part of the system
of church administration. Indirectly, however, this element of
consecration of the fundamental element in church-order — the
office of the ministry — was sufficient to impart the sense of a
Divine mission and a Divine authority to those who exercised
the right of appointment to the ministry, that is, to the civil
authority ; inevitably this meant that the rest of the church-order
PROTESTANTISM
521
which was administered by the State shone in the reflected glory
of this Divine authority, which gave the whole system the stability
which it urgently required.
Thus after the tree of the supernatural church-order had been
cut down, the stump which was left put forth branches in the
shape of a system of church-order which was, at least indirectly,
of Divine appointment, and which entrusted the government of
the Church, or rather the official representation of the pure truth
of Scripture, to the clergy and the ruling Prince.
Thus the aim which was realized in Catholicism through a
directly Divine church-order, Lutheranism, in its purely spiritual-
ized form, stripped of every kind of hierarchical or sacerdotal
organ, realized through the government and the civil administra-
tion, to which, however, precisely for that reason, there accrues
a certain semi-divinity.
The distinction between the temporal and the spiritual elements
in this system is not a separation, but only a fresh aspect of their
relationship ; the State now serves the purely spiritual Church in
a spirit of love and freedom, and by this service it dominates the
Church which has no independent legal organ of its own. Rivalry
between Church and State is excluded, theoretically, by the
assumption that in both there is at work the truth of Scripture
which unites both in the Faith; and practically by the weakness
of the Church, which depends entirely upon the State, and also
by the fact that the State incorporates religious motives and
tasks into the purpose of its own life . 236 I can only mention in
passing that it is a well-known fact that this fresh orientation of
the relation between Church and State, in its secondary aspect,
had already been foreshadowed in the Territorial Church system
of the later Middle Ages. We need, therefore, to realize that the
Lutheran ecclesiastical system was not simply the acceptance of
a tradition which was essentially foreign to its own nature, but
that from its own point of view — with its spiritual conception of
the Church, and its decided rejection of a church-order based on
the Divine right of the congregation to settle its own affairs (like
that which Calvinism evolved later on)— it was simply impossible
to pursue any other course.
Unifying Influence of
the State Church Conception
This complicated State Church social order was, however, in
spite of its artificial construction, a social whole. In this connec-
286 See p, 852.
522 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
tion the important point is that this system included the whole
sphere of Church and State, that the interests of Church and
State had become interwoven with each other, and that both the
ecclesiastical and the political authorities had combined to form
a harmonious conception of a Christian society.
It is, of course, clear that within this society the true Church
— that is, the fellowship of those who have been truly “born
again” through the Word — includes only the vitally religious
section of the population. This is the Ecclesia stride dicta , to use
the term of the theologians. But between it and the Ecclesia late
dicta , that is, the total number of those in any given region who
belong to the Church, upon whom, through the compulsory
religion of a State Church, the Church has set her seal in baptism,
and who, at least outwardly, must be constrained to listen to the
pure Word, to maintain the Christian way of life, and to respect
Christian doctrine , 237 there only exists a difference, but no
division. This agreement between the Church and the Christian
Society is expressed still more clearly in the Lutheran doctrine
of classes, which continues the mediaeval organization of the
population into sacerdotes , domini saeculares , and vulgares , as the
division into a Status ecclesiasticus politicus and oeconomicus , and defines
these three classes explicitly as ranks of the Church, or as hier-
archies . 238
This classification, which was far too rough and ready, even
for the simple conditions in Germany at that time, was, however,
very important from the practical point of view. For, as in the
mediaeval civilization, it means the distinction between a Church
in the real sense of the word and one which is not a real
Church : 2384 by the real Church is meant only the institution of
the proclamation of the “pure Word”, visibly expressed in the
clergy and the authorities in Church and State; by the Church
in the second aspect is meant the Christian Society — in the whole
range of the sphere of Church and State, in the totality of their
activity and social groups.
This is simply the mediaeval idea of the Corpus Christianum ,
within which, in the modern sense of the word, there is, as yet,
no separation between Church and State, between sacred and
secular. The civil authority and the ecclesiastical authority are
two different aspects of the one undivided Christian Society,
for which reason the Government and the State have directly
Christian aims, and the Church includes the whole of Society.
All that has been discarded is the Roman system of social
1,7 See p. 852. 181 See p. 853. tWa See above, p. 283.
PROTESTANTISM
5«3
grades within the range of a small independent State, and the
idea of a Universal Church which has the right to intervene
forcibly in all matters of human concern. This order of things has
been replaced by one in which, within any particular State,
there is a voluntary agreement between the Christian government
and the Church which consecrates all the work of the world, in
which the civil authority serves the Church through its adminis-
tration, while the Church hallows all “labour in a calling”, in
the State, in the administration of justice, in Society, and in
domestic life, as the service of God and one’s neighbour. In
theory the purpose of the whole remains religious, only the
relationship between the two authorities, whose business it is
particularly to realize this purpose, has become a different one,
through their mutual co-operation . 239
Now, however, this conception of the Church and the harmony
between the Church, the State, and the social order, which is
expressed in the Corpus Christianum, combine to form the final
assumption upon which the social philosophy of Lutheranism
is based: the whole social fabric is enclosed within the frame-
work of the Church, and is related to the religious purpose of
Society. The only question is: how and in what sense is this
relationship effected? The answer to this question will become
plain as we try to realize clearly the leading characteristics of
the Lutheran ethic. 239a
The Lutheran Ethic
The Lutheran ethic is of dual origin. Just as Church and State
exist side by side within Society, so here also we have the ethic
of love and grace on the one hand and the ethic of law and reason
on the other. The fundamental idea of this dualism is due to
Luther, and it here only modifies the mediaeval dualism in ethics.
Melancthon carried this dualistic tendency a step farther in the
dualism of a philosophical and theological morality, and ortho-
doxy has only broadened both these currents of thought, which
have branched off still farther in various directions. In so doing,
however, it was only the philosophical side which was scientifically
developed ; the theological side of the question remained bound
up with dogma. It is only in practical life that we see both ten-
dencies combined and mutually influencing one another. This
combination is regarded as something quite natural and obvious,
which is carried out in practice without further reflection.
Ultimately, indeed, this is true of all the previous Christian ethic.
1,1 Sec p, 854. am See p. 854.
524 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Even the first scientific ethical development on a larger scale
which was embodied in Thomism was in reality only systematic
in so far as it followed in the steps of Aristotle and made the
Christian virtues square with those laid down by Aristotle. Even
Thomism did not dream of presenting ethical problems in their
widest range and in their ultimate conceptual origins. Thus,
since the Christian ethic in general is rather a practically useful
Ethos with individual points which have been developed into
theories, so also the ethic of Protestantism, and, above all, the
ethic of Luther, is not a theory which is in any way comparable
with its dogmatic system. Ethical theory only comes into being
when — as at one period in late antiquity, and also at the time
of the Enlightenment — the natural ethical foundations of life
have been destroyed . 2395
The Christianity of the Middle Ages and of the confessional
period had a scientific theory of its own doctrines, and from the
estimate of life based upon this metaphysic it drew the main
impulse of its ethic. So long as that was dominant, the ethical
results followed as a matter of course. All that needed to be
worked out in further detail were points like the following: the
relation between the moral element or “good works”, and grace
in general, the relation between Christian morality and secular
institutions and the morality which is not based upon the ethical
results of grace, or with the traditions of the ancient “philo-
sophical” morality, which regulated the relations between law
and freedom, between the Christian morality of life and the
impossibility of overcoming sin. Everything else was settled,
naturally, by life itself.
Thus the real Lutheran ethic of the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries has to be sought out and reconstructed by the modern
scholar, sought, that is, in the sphere of ordinary human life and
in fragmentary theoretical statements, and this ethic will be
discovered not merely in theological dogmatic statements, but in
the theories of jurists and political economists as well . 240
So far as Lutheranism is concerned this is a comparatively
easy matter. The Lutheran ethic consists primarily in the estab-
lishment of a religious relation with God, in that love to God
which humbly, joyfully, and thankfully surrenders the self to Him
S 3 »b This is why it is so mistaken to try to save the honour of early Protestantism
by attempting to discover in it “theological moral philosophers’*. The people
of that day neither desired nor needed any ethic alongside of dogma ; this only
became necessary after the upheaval of the Enlightenment.
840 See p. 855.
PROTESTANTISM
525
in prayer and self-discipline, and the outpouring of this love of
God, which cannot give anything to God, upon one’s neighbour.
It is an inward impulse which uses to its fullest extent the over-
flowing happiness produced by justification, making it a means
of leading one’s neighbour to God and of uniting him with
oneself in God.
Since however, as a rule, the Lutheran considered that fulfilling
your “duty to your neighbour” meant the wise use of all the
obvious opportunities, stimuli, and forms of the natural life, with
the avoidance of all unbalanced mysticism and all special cliques,
this means, then, in the second place, that “loving one’s neighbour
as oneself” implies that all the duties and tasks which life brings
naturally in its train, especially those connected with the family,
the State, the labour and vocational organization, are to be filled
with this spirit of love, which makes these forms into methods
and means of expression of the Christian love of mankind. The
mysticism which centres in love to God and man pours itself into
the existing forms of human life : into the life of class and guild,
into family and domestic life, into the life of the State and the
administration of justice. Sublime religious feeling is clothed in
the garb of the most ordinary and everyday forms of service
within the home and the ordinary duties of citizenship. Down to
the present day the ethical teachers of Lutheranism only differ
from each other in this — that some would give more scope for the
independent development of the specifically religious and mystical
ethic, while others would exhaust its significance entirely in
loving service to the brethren in an ordered society as “the great
workshop of the love of one’s neighbour”. In the former there
is still a trace of the original tension which Luther set between
the sacred and the secular, between love and law, while with
thinkers of the latter kind there predominates Luther’s demand
for obedience towards all natural ordinances which the God who
is concealed in history had Himself created, and in which there-
fore He desires to see the believing soul exercising love and
happiness in simple obedience.
The ideal of such a way of life is reflected in the conception of
the Christian Moral Law, which here appears not so much as the
law which effects conversion, but as the interpretation and the
description of the impulse towards activity which is set alongside
of the bliss of justification by faith, for which therefore the legal
form has only an unreal significance. The Lutheran theory of
Christian freedom from the Law is still maintained, but in
practice this theory changes into a purely Protestant legalism based
526 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
on the Catechism. This Law is contained in the Decalogue, which
in the usual way is regarded as exactly the same as the Natural
Moral Law. The Decalogue is thus held to include all the stimuli,
opportunities, assumptions, and social forms of Natural Law
under the Second Table, and at the same time, in its First Table,
it includes the inspiration of the whole with the Christian spirit
of faith and love. This distinction between the two Tables of the
Law means that the dualistic ethic was still maintained. But since
believers are urged constantly not to allow brotherly love to
peter out in vague and indefinite sentiment, or in special cliques
and sentimental emotionalism, the purely interior, spiritual
ethic which utterly renounces all use of law and force, finds, in
actual practice, very little scope ; as swiftly as possible it is trans-
ferred into the ordered sphere where love is expressed in dis-
charging the duties of one’s vocation, in civil life, in a healthy
division of labour, and in loyal obedience. This is the channel into
which, so far as possible, the currents of purely personal and
human relations are guided, in the interests of law and order.
Further, domestic and civil authority is to some extent hallowed
by the fact that it has been appointed by God, and this sense of
consecration almost effaces the stain which clings to it as part of
the sphere of law and conflict. Thus, alongside of the ethical
labour involved in the effort to attain interior union with God,
which culminates in communion with Christ in the Sacrament,
for which the soul has been prepared by repentance and self-
examination, there is only the ethic of the service of the State
and of the “calling” which is consecrated by Divine appointment.
The fact that this ethic lays a great deal of emphasis upon order,
stability, and peace entirely obliterates in theory, and also modi-
fies in practice, the fact of its connection with the severity of the
law and the unrest caused by the struggle for existence . 241
We do not need to deal any farther with the question of this
“morality of the disposition” (Gesinnungsmoral ) , which was to
breathe its spirit into the secular forms of life. This has been done
by the early theologians in their treatises on dogmatics or on
practical asceticism. They do not call this Christian ethic an
“ethic” at all but Pietas y and treat it in this sense in Scholae
pietatis, or similar practically edifying treatises, which indeed also
include the whole thorny apparatus of the dogmatic doctrine of
justification by faith. It is only the modem Lutherans who have
141 Cf. the tractate De lege in Gerhards Loci comunes (ed. Cotta ) , V and VI. Here
also there is a detailed explanation of the Decalogue which contains a great
deal of ethical material.
PROTESTANTISM
527
transformed this subject into an independent “theological” ethic,
into which they have also incorporated the absolutely necessary
component parts of the “natural” ethic. Men felt the need,
however, for a detailed presentation of the whole subject, giving
a minute and exact analysis of all the natural virtues, social
duties, opportunities, and obligations which were to be hallowed,
Christianized, and filled with the new outlook on life. This alone
was the real “ethic”, as early Lutheranism saw it. This “ethic”,
however, was simply the Aristotelian scholastic ethic, revived by
the Stoics and by Cicero, and renewed by the Humanists, which
in its scholastic form had been re-edited by Melancthon (whose
work was destined to influence thought for two hundred years
to come), while at the same time it also made use of the Jesuit
Neo-Scholasticism which had dealt with the same material in
a more detailed way. The stock of ideas which constituted the
intellectual capital of the “ethic” of both confessions was exactly
the same; that is, if we only use the term “ethic” in its contem-
porary meaning of the philosophical ethic; this “ethic”, in fact,
was simply a purified mediaeval Aristotelianism, or the familiar
range of ideas connected with Aristotle’s interpretation of Natural
Law. Since the Natural Law is only Divinely proclaimed and
summarized in the Decalogue, this “philosophical ethic” also
could be developed upon the basis of the Decalogue without any
loss of its purely philosophical and natural character. 2413 This
ethic dealt with the conception of the Natural Moral Law,
Natural Right, the Aristotelian conception of virtue, the four
cardinal virtues — all on thoroughly traditional lines. Its aim was
to show how knowledge of this kind was useful in the following
ways: (1) it was a preparation for repentance; (2) as justitia
civilis , i.e. as a loyal external discipline emptied of all spiritual
content, it helped to preserve order; (3) it provided the basis of
reason for the idea of the existence of God and of the moral
government of the world ; and (4) finally, when this knowledge
was inspired with a spiritual temper, it merged into the unity
of the Christian idea of love.
The other aspects of social life which really belong to the
sphere of Natural Law — the Family, the State, division of labour,
and economics — were only superficially touched by this ethic, and
they were really worked out in the special forms of discipline
which were constructed upon the basis of the Law of Nature
* ua Modern writers and critics who do not know the origin or the significance
of this group of ideas usually complain about the “still” confused mingling
of philosophical and theological ethics.
5*8 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
and of Positive Law — that is, in jurisprudence, the doctrine of the
State, and political economy, and in the sections of dogmatics
which had borrowed from them. Roman law, in particular,
seemed to be a development both of the Decalogue and of the
Law of Nature ; every time these materials were used, however,
their connection with the positive law, in use at the time, also
had to be considered.
The resemblance to the Catholic ethic is obvious. In both
instances the Ethos of real life is only constructed with the addi-
tional aid of the range of ideas centring in Natural Law and of
the ethical material of ancient philosophy. An ecclesiastical
ethic which also covers the whole field of secular civilization still
makes use of this complementary method, upon which the
Early Church had already drawn for the same purpose, and
which the Mediaeval Church had developed very fully along
scholastic lines. In this question of dealing with a secular civiliza-
tion which the Church had to accept and assimilate, Protestantism
continued the fundamental tendencies of the Catholic tradition;
just as she had done in the conception of the Church itself. At
the same time the difference between Lutheranism and Catholi-
cism in this respect is clear : Protestantism has no hierarchy which
can legally and forcibly regulate the harmonious development
and relation between the different stages; in the ethical sphere
interpenetration has taken the place of an orderly succession of
ascending stages. According to the new conceptions of Protestant-
ism the supernatural is now immanent in the natural sphere ; this
immanence, however, must not be understood in the sense of
modern doctrines of Divine Immanence — it does not mean the
Immanence of God in the world — but it is the Immanence of
the Love of God which overcomes the world, in obedience to
secular institutions — indifferent and sinfully corrupt in them-
selves, but positively appointed by the Will of God — and the
Immanence of love in the religious sense, present in all activity
which conduces to material welfare and order, an activity which
is the natural method appointed by God for the manifestation of
love to humanity. The meaning and purpose of it all is not
material progress, but the exercise of the obedience of faith
(which renounces all caprice and self-will), and of humble and
grateful love.
Lutheranism and the Law of Nature
We cannot, however, fully appreciate either the similarity or
the difference between Catholicism and Lutheranism in this
PROTESTANTISM
529
respect until we have made a special study of one point in which
Lutheranism differs from the Catholic and from the Calvinistic
ethic alike; (on this point, indeed, the Calvinistic ethic is finally
and essentially in agreement with the Catholic ethic). This
question is the peculiar Lutheran conception of the Law of
Nature, which exists within the rational idea of Natural Law
common to both confessions.
In this question Luther struck out on a peculiar line of his
own ^ 42 At first, it is true, he shared the traditional point of view
with which we are already familiar, which indeed did not form
part of the province of theology, but of reason and practical
philosophy; in rejecting Roman theology and the Canon Law
Luther did not need to reject the rest of the tradition as well.
All he did was to separate the mediation elements from the rest,
making a clear distinction between them and the Scriptural
ethic of love; he restricted the former elements to the “official”
sphere, the ordinary “calling”, to law and to the State, requiring
that all should adapt themselves to the forms of life thus condi-
tioned which are so harshly opposed to the ethic of love. In so
doing, however, Luther had not merely re-ordered the relation
of the Natural Law to the Church and the Gospel, but he had
reinterpreted the Natural Law itself. From the very outset he
explains the Law of Nature in an entirely conservative sense,
which emphasizes solely the utilitarian expediency of the concrete
order, in which the shaping of Society itself seems to have been
produced by Providence in the natural development of history,
and all order and welfare depend upon unconditional obedience
towards the authorities which have come into being in the course
of the historical process. This interpretation glorifies power for
its own sake, which in fallen humanity has become the essence
of law ; it therefore glorifies whatever authority may happen to
be dominant at any given time. Even when this power is most
scandalously abused its authority still holds good, and every act
of resistance to this authority destroys the very conception of the
social order based on Natural Law, and thus destroys the
foundation of Society in general . 243
In Luther’s innate conservatism, in his pietistic indifference
towards external things from the Christian point of view, in his
belief in an omnipresent Providence which moves and works
behind human thought, in the comparison between social sub-
ordination and the religious humility of absolute dependence
upon the Grace of God — above all, in his deep sense of the opposi-
842 See p. 856. 248 See p. 856.
vol. n. p
530 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
tion between the order of love and the order of law and the
universal struggle for existence : in all these ways Luther instinc-
tively regards Natural Law as the establishment of an unrestricted
positive authority, effected by God through reason; no amount
of experience of a refractory reality can shake him out of the
belief that this authority is based upon reason and the Divine Will.
This is why he opposes every attempt to reconstruct Society and
mould it on rational lines, which is based on the interests and the
reason of the isolated individual ; this is why he refuses to consider
or permit any individual co-operation at all in the endeavour to
build up a satisfying “organic" system which will include them
all. In his theory, therefore, the idea of a social contract naturally
disappears ; in it there is no room for the transference of power
based on the explicit or implicit consent of those who are governed,
nor for any “right of resistance 9 9 or revolution which extends
farther than frank criticism, nor for any equalitarian conception
of social human relationships, nor for any communistic ideal . 244
This was already excluded from the Primitive State ; that glorifica-
tion of power was already present in the nature of pure unclouded
Reason; even in Paradise this meant authority and reverence
within the family, and submission to circumstances and duties
given by God. Sin has merely vastly increased the significance of
that power, since the preservation of order is only possible if
positive authority is maintained, which, however, has further been
linked up with evil and selfishness. But even when this (evil and
selfishness) has been admitted, the fact remains that authority
must not be resisted. Non-resistance is, therefore, not primarily a
demand of the Gospel, but a requirement of Natural Law, since
according to this theory no one is fit to judge his own affairs, and
every power which permits resistance destroys its own being, as
Luther reiterated unceasingly when the peasants made their
demands for reform. When, at a later date, a “right of resistance 99
for the estates of the Empire was asserted, Luther rightly expressed
the opinion that this demand did not accord with their conception
of authority over the peasants. 244a
At this point the course of mediaeval thought had displayed
a good deal of uncertainty. The problem was this : if the Stoic-
Rationalist ideas which had become an integral part both of
Imperial and of Canon Law were logically developed, they led
to the idea of a social contract, to the doctrine of the right of
244 Ehrhardtypp. 309 and 310. Unfortunately E.’s work is very far from exhaustive.
244a Cf. von Schubert : Beitr.zur ev. Bekenntnis- und Bundnisbildung , 1520-39 (?• /•
Kirch. -Gesch.> XXX, p. 295).
PROTESTANTISM
53 *
revolution and of tyrannicide, to the rational development of the
State in accordance with the rights of the individual. If, on the
other hand, Aristotle was taken as the guide, this led to the doc-
trine that Society arose organically and inevitably out of Reason ;
this meant that all that was natural and necessary was ascribed
to Providence, in which the only right course was submission to
the natural process which was directed by God, in which sinful
extremes alone were to be avoided.
If, however, it was felt that this Divine element in authority
needed further support, emphasis was then laid on the Divine
appointment of authority and on the mythological glorification
of power — on the founding of States by means of the Babylonian
confusion of tongues, on the Divine nature of the legislation in
the Old Testament. When, however, on further reflection, men
realized that all the institutions of fallen humanity were only
relatively Divine, there arose the ideal of the Primitive State, with
its equality, brotherly love, and community of possessions. The
mediaeval doctrine of Natural Law moved uncertainly among
these ideas, making various efforts to weld them into a coherent
system . 245
Within this confusion Luther had now created a stable order,
even though it was very one-sided, and not always logically
maintained. He achieved this by doing away with the Stoic and
Rationalist elements entirely, regarding the natural development
of actual authority as an institution of Providence to be revered
unconditionally, teaching that this natural development was
authenticated by Divine appointment and confirmation in the
Old Testament; thus Luther came to teach a conservative
authoritarian conception of the Law of Nature, which deduced
from the conception of authority and its utility for human welfare
the demand for an unconditional respect for authority as such.
The fact that this authority has to use methods of severity and
compulsion, law and dominion, is due to fallen humanity, and
serves to keep sin in check. This point of view was combined with
an attitude of contempt for the masses, amongst whom he thought
it rare to find, not merely true Christians, but even wise and
reasonable men. In fallen humanity the masses need to be guided
and controlled ; to Luther, however, it seems probable that he felt
145 These different elements are well put together in K. Kohler: Staatslehre der
Vorreformatoren (Jahrbb.f. deutsche Theol., XIX ) : “The inconsistency of the latter
(organic Aristotelian) view with the theory of a social contract which finally
depends upon the arbitrary will of humanity does not seem to have entered
So-and-so’s head” (p . 555).
532 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
this to be essentially the need of humanity as such. For this
development of authority is due precisely to reason. Luther,
therefore, believes that peace and order, a slow process of organic
development from the existing situation, is a better method of
inducing prosperity and progress than a violent break with the
old order and a fresh beginning. Since within the Christian sphere
the Spirit has to work gradually from within outwards, reason
ought to work thus within the natural sphere. All along Luther
is opposed to revolutionary schemes which are based on an indi-
vidualistic point of view, and he is in favour of an authority which
controls, conditions, and gradually moulds them, even in case
of necessity achieving its end by force. In this glorification of
authority there were certain resemblances to the doctrine of
Machiavelli, which the early Lutherans had already noted . 246
The only difference was this : Luther lays the duty of the preserva-
tion of the law of reason upon the ruling powers, and binds this
in a Christian society to free obedience to the Gospel. Even at the
present time the followers of Darwin, despotic politicians, and
masterful men get on better with Lutheran conservatives than
with the representatives of Liberal ethical individualism. The
main features of the conservative doctrine of the State and of
Society have been foreshadowed in Luther’s theory, and the
“Christian world outlook” of our Conservatives in its most
important political and social sections is based upon Luther’s
positivist and realistic conception of Natural Law . 247
Under the influence of the negotiations which led to the
Schmalkaldic League it is true that Luther broke through this
doctrine and asserted the “right of resistance”, not merely upon
the ground of the Positive Law of the Empire, but also upon the
ground of Natural Law. This, however, was clearly due to foreign
influence, above all to the influence of Hesse and Strassburg, and
a large number of his followers rejected his conclusions, using his
very words to support their case. In the struggle between the
citizens of Magdeburg and Charles V the theories about the
“right of resistance” revived, but they speedily disappeared. In
reality, they did not harmonize either with Luther’s opinions or
with his logic. He manifested his own view of Natural Law in the
declaration that the Greeks and the Romans did not know the
true Natural Law, but that the Persians, the Tatars, and people
of that kind 247a observed the Natural Law far better.
846 See p. 857. 247 See p. 858.
84 7a Cf. Cardauns, pp. 8-19. The passage about the Persians in Ob KriegsletUe ,
etc,, B,A., IV, 1, pp, 998-402, Unfortunately, Cardauns * treatment is not
PROTESTANTISM
533
Although at this point Luther’s views had diverged far from
Catholic Natural Law, in other important features, such as the
mingling of morality and law, in the comparison of Natural Law
with Christian morality, and with the emphasis to which that
gives rise upon reasonableness and equity, which modifies formal
law in favour of ethical judgment, he remained true to it. This
modification, of course, does not apply to the law of the State,
nor to the laws of punishment ; this, however, will have become
clear in the preceding pages. Within the law of the State Luther’s
rigid idea of Original Sin and his demand for severe discipline,
his contempt for the masses, and his conception of the civil
authority as the representative of Divine punishment and reward,
inclined him to extreme severity, and he was urgent in recom-
mending the exercise of penalties like breaking on the wheel,
decapitation, and torture . 248
Within the sphere of civil law, however, Luther desired to see
the Natural Law administered with a leniency which takes all
the various factors of motive, necessity, and circumstance into
account. In his view the guiding principle of the Natural Law is
that we should do to everyone as we would like them to do to us.
In this respect love is also the meaning of Natural Law, and is
thus conformed to Christian morality. This leads him to demand
that Positive Law should adjust itself to Natural Law and to the
Christian ideal, with which, in the last resort, it is identical . 249
While in all questions of authority and control, of dominion and
of subordination, his conception of Natural Law is a naturalistic
recognition of the dominant authority and of prevailing distinc-
tions, with an aristocratic emphasis upon the gulf which separates
exhaustive. How fluctuating opinions were is shown by von Schubert: Beitr .
Z . /. K.-G., XXX, pp. 271-316. The Natural Law of rational defence, the
Natural Law of pure authority as it was worked out against the peasants,
the Positive Law of the Empire, of an only conditional supremacy of the
Emperor, and the Divine law of mere suffering and endurance, are here
all mingled ; see MelancthorCs verdict, p. 313.
248 Cf. the basing of the first great and independent working out of the law
of punishment upon these Lutheran ideas by Ben. Carpzov in Stintzing: Geschichte
der deutschen Rechtswissenschaft, II, 1684 , pp. 70-80. The great part which trial
for witchcraft plays in this law of punishment goes back likewise to Luther’s
faith in demons, for he could only explain to himself the evil of the world and
its resistance to the Gospel from the working of the Devil. Luther, however,
always fought against the fantastic eccentricities of the faith in witchcraft ;
v. Kawerau in W. W., Berliner Ausgabe, IV, 1 , pp. 44 ff.
249 On this point v. Kohler in the section Das Verhdltnis zum kanonischen Recht,
pp. JU-132. Here the identity with the mediaeval point of view is rightly
emphasized. For epikie or aequitdt,pp . 46 and 98.
534 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the rulers and the ruled, on the other hand, in all questions of
personal behaviour and of merely civil conflict, his conception of
Natural Law was one of reasonable equity, which was opposed
to a strictly legal formalism ; it was, in fact, an attempt to reduce
law, as far as possible, to the principles of human consideration
for the suffering and the oppressed, and the deliberate ending of
conflict. In this respect also the conservative theory of Society
follows Luther even at the present day; in all human relation-
ships which do not affect the problem of authority and domination
it urges a policy of goodwill and justice, freed from the rigid
formalism of law. This theory is averse to surrounding the indi-
vidual with abstract legal guarantees, because this is the spirit
of the individualistic-rational principle in general, but it likes to
replace law by Christian consideration on patriarchal lines and
personal fair dealing. In the sphere of authority Natural Law is
compared with the Christian idea of authority, in the sphere of
private property with the Christian idea of love. The harshness
of the doctrine of authority is compensated by a Christian softening
of the standpoint of law in private relations. This is the early
Lutheran doctrine, and to-day it is still the conservative con-
ception of law , 260 and in reality the Christian nature of morality
is expressed more clearly in this than in the public law of
authority; here also, however, it is a Christian piety strongly
tinged with patriarchalism, which distinguishes it very clearly
from the virile individualism and the corresponding legal con-
sciousness of Calvinism.
Since, however, Luther’s idea of Natural Law is that of the
Divine activity expressed in reason, he loves to emphasize God
as the Founder of these institutions, and wherever it is possible he
tries to find proofs of their direct Divine appointment.
When, however, he takes that line his assertions cease to have
any element of Natural Law at all, and the mythical element
predominates. Thus he asserts that the Family is an institution
of Natural Law, but he also asserts that it was expressly instituted
by God. Indirectly the State was instituted at the same time as
the Family; but its Divine origin was also often confirmed in the
Old Testament. The economic organization and labour were
held to be due to the Divine Command at the expulsion of Adam
and Eve from the Garden of Eden. In detail, too, he often sup-
ports his statement by Old Testament examples; indeed, it often
seems as though he had entirely forgotten his former insistence
on the freedom of the Christian from the Jewish law, for he uses
See p. 858 .
PROTESTANTISM
535
the Old Testament as though it were a legal code. When he is
confronted with problems connected with marriage and the
question of serfdom he refers to the Mosaic Law, and his fatal
appeal to the bigamy of the Old Testament in the case of the
Landgrave of Hesse is well known.
In all this, however, Luther still only considered the Mosaic
Law to be identical with reason; he regarded it as the Divine
confirmation or proclamation of reasonable rules and regulations,
but not as the revealed Law of God. This leads, of course, to the
production of a curious mingling of arguments drawn from the
Bible and from the Law of Nature ; this mixture of arguments,
however, only proves (and this is of fundamental importance
for our inquiry) that the assumption of an inward unity and
conformity of Natural Law with the Christian spirit is the under-
lying idea; upon this alone the relative uniformity of early
Lutheran culture is based, and to-day it still forms the basis of
the Christian piety of the conservative section of the population,
which includes some very un-Christian elements . 261
While Luther thus often concealed his idea of Natural Law
behind positive Scriptural statements, and further, when he was
opposed by the jurists who naturally had to preserve the continuity
of technical law, with much use of strong language again with-
drew to the position which emphasized the contrast between law
and Christian freedom, these ideas were trimmed and shaped
and moulded into smoothness by Melancthon . 252 He was the
Protestant doctor of Natural Law; further, his scheme was
adopted by jurisprudence as a whole. Melancthon laid greater
emphasis upon the philosophical character of Natural Law, and
he strove so hard for reconciliation that the Lutheran tension
between the Law and Christianity, between Reason and Revela-
tion, was ultimately merged in the idea of a friendly harmony
which has been Divinely ordained. From that time forward
faith in this harmony, and the ideal of such an accord between
natural assumptions and spiritual inspiration, became a peculiar
feature of Lutheranism. In his ethical works and juridical
speeches Melancthon expounded the conceptions of Natural Law
with which we are familiar, in the classic formulas of Cicero,
with some additional material drawn from Aristotle, upon whose
Politks he also wrote a commentary. He explains the Natural
Law according to Cicero in the light of the Decalogue, which he
considers identical with it. This identification of the two enables
him to introduce the religious elements which the pagans had
151 Sec p. 859. 151 See p. 859.
536 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
lost. The result of this is a conception of the State and of a legal
right to inflict penalties, which is based upon the idea of reason
as the support of discipline and of education against sin, as well
as of the protection of order and the common weal. This theory
also led to a conception of civil law which recognized in Roman
Law the positive legal development of the Natural Law, which
is identical with the Natural Law of the Decalogue and makes
the Roman Law the objective legal standard for the jurists of
the future in exactly the same way as the Bible is the objective
standard for the theologians.
Melancthon claims that the Decalogue is valid, not as the
Jewish Law, but as the product of Natural Law, and, therefore,
that the reasonable Roman Law is also the law for Christians,
and not, as the Sectarians say, the Mosaic Law. To this written
law he also relates the Aristotelian doctrine of the dominion of
law in the State. Here also the Gospel is united with reason. At
the same time the Natural Law leads to the organization of
Society in classes and callings as well as to private property,
which was indeed at first held to belong to the relative Natural
Law of the fallen State ; now, however, it must be urged all the
more decidedly that it is a Divine institution.
All this shows that Melancthon was inclined to be more
rationalistic than Luther. This accounts for the reappearance of
the old rationalistic ideas of the consent of those who are governed
to the ruling authority. At the same time, however, Melancthon
argues that the State owes its authority to a Mandatum Dei , which
was already in existence in Paradise when the authority of the
family was instituted ; at this point, therefore, he enters into entire
agreement with the Lutheran authoritative Law of Nature with
its emphasis on compulsion and order. Melancthon lays still
greater stress upon this idea by making the formal stringency of
the existing legal administration far more binding, while he
makes far less use of the idea of equity than Luther.
On the other hand, Melancthon asserts the “right of resistance”
far more broadly than Luther; this he does, however, only by
appealing to the positive Roman Law, in which the Emperor
declares that he desires to exercise his power with the consent of
his subjects, and by an appeal to the German Law of the Empire,
in which the liberty of a privileged class is justified in resisting an
Emperor who breaks his contract with his subjects. Finally,
against the worst injustices he recognizes the right to resist also
as de jure naturae , and Luther accepted this reluctantly enough,
commending the problem to the jurists and to reason. This,
PROTESTANTISM
537
however, had very little effect upon the Lutheran interpretation
of Natural Law. On the whole, Luther’s influence was the stronger
of the two, and both in dogma and also in Natural Law Melanc-
thon’s peculiarities disappeared. Although the Humanist admirer
of Aristotle preferred the aristocratic city-republics to the absolu-
tism which tended towards “Tyrannis”, with the decline of the
cities these ideas also naturally disappeared from the political
theory of Lutheranism. In reality Luther’s conception of authority
was more suited to absolutism, and his dislike of the “Sakra-
mentierer”* was equally a dislike of the republics of Upper
Germany . 2623
The whole system of later jurisprudence developed within the
framework constructed by Melancthon, the only difference being
that in matters affecting the legal administration of the State
the conservative authoritative aspect was emphasized still more
strongly, although the formulae of a tacit consent of the citizens
to the ruling power were still reluctantly retained . 253 It was only
in the seventeenth century that an actual constitutional law and
a detailed political theory were really formulated ; until then the
material was divided amongst dogmatics, philosophical ethics,
interpretation of the politics of Aristotle, and the exposition of
suitable passages in the Roman law, and it reproduced only the
familiar ideas, with increasing emphasis on the Divine appoint-
ment of the ruling authority, which corresponded to the increasing
absolutism ; this also took place in the theories of the State evolved
by Catholic and Anglican absolutism. The more exclusive con-
stitutional law of the seventeenth century then turned towards
the empirical law material. Thus, in principle, the conception of
Luther and Melancthon remained, of the reference of the State
equally to reason and to Divine appointment; and within the
territorial State itself Bodin’s new theory of sovereignty was
combined with the earlier doctrine of a humble and trustful
surrender to the authority appointed by God. This meant that
the elements of Natural Law in the theory were thrust more into
the background, and were finally reduced to the bare statement
of the Divine guidance of reason in the production of political
authority. The more the school of Grotius developed a purely
rational theory of Natural Law, severed from theology, the more
stoutly the Lutherans maintained this theory of Divine appoint-
ment; they assert that, although this “Divine appointment” takes
* I.e. those who denied the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the
Lord’s Supper. — Translator,
852a See p. 860. 253 See p. 860.
538 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
place indirectly, it is Divine all the same. The result is that they
summarize their theory in this statement: the powers that be,
just as they are, come from God.
At a later date, Stahl’s theory of an irrational Natural Law
instead of the rational Natural Law provided the modem Con-
servative theory with a scientific foundation. The dominant
system of Aristotelian-Scholastic metaphysics provided no scien-
tific support for this theory, and indeed within the Lutheran
orthodoxy of the day such support was not required. Pufendorf,
who in his general outlook was a good Lutheran, and whose
view of the positive value of the State and of civilization was
merely more hopeful than that of Luther, sought to find a way
of making a bridge over the gulf between the individualistic-
rationalistic Natural Law of Grotius and the Lutheran realism
and positivism of the idea of law and authority. This proved an
almost impossible undertaking, however, partly because the
Grotius’ school of thought outstripped his ideas altogether, and
partly because the orthodox pessimism about sin and the later
Lutheran doctrine of the Divine institution of the ruling powers
were repelled by his theories. Thus Pufendorf made no permanent
contribution to the Natural Law of the Church, and in these
circles people were satisfied with a highly aphoristic theory and
a theological-absolutist practice. When Christian Thomasius
went over to the side of Pufendorf, the Danish Court chaplain
wrote a pamphlet against him entitled The Interest of Princes
in the True Religion . In it he exalted the Lutheran Church as
the most secure support of the commonwealth, and urged the
Royal House to consider that this dogma that all royal power
comes directly from God is greatly to their advantage. At the
same time he accused Calvinism and Catholicism of encouraging
rebellion and “tumult” because they oppose this dogma. This,
of course, is no longer genuine Lutheranism at all; it is simply
an attempt to bolster up Absolutism with the aid of Lutheran
doctrine. It must, however, be admitted that, to a great extent,
this doctrine did lay itself open to such a construction . 264
The “natural” doctrine of Society and of economics developed
on similar lines. At first there was no need of any scientific theory
at all, since existing conditions were quite obviously the expres-
sion of Natural Law and of the guidance of Providence. All that
was required was a general theological and ethical point of
view, founded on principle, and with that a practical technique
of government, which, in connection with the existing situation
See p. 860.
PROTESTANTISM
539
and the positive-legal conditions, made it possible to carry over
the still strongly patrimonial administration of the State into
a supremacy of the State, bureaucratically rationalized and
financially secure.
In so doing this patriarchal economic doctrine made use of
the conservative Natural Law and theological ethical theories,
exactly as the doctrine of the State had done. Thus the theory
was developed in the closest connection with the likewise very
aphoristic philosophy of the State and of the interpretation of
Aristotle, which, in the old scholastic style, treated the State,
Society, and economics solely from the point of view of ethics
and theology; the practical instructions also were still full of
Biblical and ancient Humanistic quotations, in which they
expressed in theory the theological-juridical fundamental out-
look. With the presupposition of sinful and corrupt Nature and
of the providential reaction of Nature against this corruption,
this is a religiously defined, relative physiocracy, a “natural ”
economic doctrine which is based upon the conditions][of fallen
humanity; in essentials itjis simply the continuation of the
scholastic theory, which only revives Aristotle, and which, by
means of a certain observation of reality by modern Humanists,
has been made more practical. Above all, however, this Lutheran
doctrine of Society and of economics was the source from which
the Lutheran Natural Law received its bent towards a conserva-
tive and authoritarian tendency, in close connection with its
whole conception of the nature of authority and of supremacy . 256
Thus in classical Lutheranism there is a voluntary agreement
between the authorities in Church and State, in order that,
together, they may realize the religious end of Christian Society.
It represents the fusion of the natural, philosophical, and secular
ethic with the Biblical, supernatural, and spiritual ethic, blending
into a whole way of life, in which the natural forms of life are to
be permeated with the religious spirit of love. This constitutes
a uniform system of Christian civilization^ike that of the Catholi-
cism of the Middle Ages. Similarly, this social system possesses
the ideal of a uniform sociological fundamental theory; only,
since the basis and meaning of the uniform system of life are now
different, the sociological fundamental theory of Lutheranism is
also different. This difference is obvious : the fundamental theory
of Lutheranism has not been constructed upon the conception
of the organism.
848 Sec p. 86 1.
540 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Social Theory of Lutheranism
The social theory of the Middle Ages had expressed its Christian
individualism thus : within every section of Society the individual
was legally entitled to have his interests considered, in accordance
with the standards of the class to which he belonged, while the
regulation of the organism in accordance with these requirements
was left to the supreme power of the Church. In Lutheranism,
however, Christian individualism becomes purely subjective,
with no legal claim on Society or on the Church, without any
power of external realization, and at bottom both essentially
and theoretically it has no sense of the need for fellowship, since
it is only out of love that it submits to the life of the community
at all.
Thus Lutheran Christian individualism has retired behind
the line of battle of all external events and outward activity,
into a purely personal spirituality, into the citadel of a freedom
which no events of the external order can touch, a position so
impregnable that neither joy nor sorrow, the world or Society
can capture it. This spirituality is based on nothing save the
“Word”, which is guaranteed by the Church; it therefore
regards the Church simply as the Herald of the Word, endowed
with a purely spiritual miraculous converting power; it has no
conception of the Church as an ethical organization of Christen-
dom as a whole. Here, within the sanctuary of this spirituality,
Lutheran individualism knows no bounds ; its only rule is that of
faith and sacrament. On this exalted plane the Christian is king
and lord over all things ; he has an invincible faith in Providence
and an unshakable trust in God ; and the Christian spirit which
he has received moulds his character in an atmosphere of entire
spiritual freedom. However, as soon as the Christian believer
turns from this spirituality to take his part in real life, he can only
express his inner liberty through submission to the existing order,
as a method of manifesting Christian love to the brethren, and
to Society as a whole, or as something evil which has to be passively
endured and accepted; the only exception which is here recog-
nized is when the Christian is commanded to deny his faith — it
then becomes his duty to resist. Unlimited in itself, this Christian
individualism possesses no organ by which it can either express
its own thoughts or secure its own existence, and its influence
on the outside world is nil. To the extent, however, in which the
Christian spirit does attempt to permeate the natural institutions
of ordinary life, it does not appear outwardly as a fellowship of
PROTESTANTISM
54i
individuals, formed on a religious basis, but as a spirit which
seeks to absorb the whole complex of secular institutions and
social life into love ; this spirit of love leads the Christian to
submit unconditionally to the social order which had been
established by God and by reason for the good of the whole;
and it regards the Family, the State, Society in general, and all
labour merely as methods of realizing and exercising the Christian
spirit of love and obedience. Thus, when we recall the two elements
of the fundamental theory of Catholicism, the organic and the
patriarchal elements, we see that here the organic aspect has
entirely disappeared.
So far as real life is concerned, therefore, the patriarchal
principle alone remains ; this, however, is now developed to its
fullest extent, undeterred by the necessity for making any com-
promise with the organic principle, while at the same time, in
the demand for the religious spirit of love and obedience, it gains
a fuller expression in theory. Thomist Patriarchalism, however,
was always more of a passive acceptance of the various differences
in rank and power, in authority over others and in wealth — a
situation which it regarded as both a penalty and a remedy for
sin; the organic principle within Thomism, on the other hand,
laid an emphasis upon individualism which maintained the ideal
of the freedom, equality, and fellowship of the Primitive State ;
and, at least to some extent, the system of the Religious Orders
actualized this genuinely Christian order.
Lutheran Patriarchalism, however, more and more came to
regard the jus naturale secundarium as a purely Divine institution,
which the forgiven soul, happy and humble in its surrender to
God, accepts unquestioningly, and as the wise order of reason,
in obedience to which the natural welfare of man also is best
secured ; to Christian love obedience to this Divine and reasonable
order becomes a joyful duty. The same spirit is revealed in the
fact that the comparison of existing conditions with a very dif-
ferent ideal Primitive State is emphasized less and less by Lutheran
thinkers, while increasing stress is laid on the “patriarchal”
virtues, such as care and responsibility for others, trust and
reverence, and these are made the sum-total of the whole ethical
system, in so far as it refers to external social behaviour. As the
relation of God to man is itself a patriarchal one, so also that of
men to each other becomes the same. Since this fundamental
theory can be realized most fully within the Family, which is
necessarily based on authority and reverence, the terminology
and the spirit in this fundamental theory are then exparftied
542 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
from the Family until they cover the whole of the rest of
life.
The Prince becomes the “Father of his country”, and his
subjects are the “children of the country” ; the lord of the manor
is the “Father of the estate” who cares for his children and expects
obedience from them, and in virtue of his inheritance as judge
represents God to them, while the dependent peasants become
the “children of the estate”, who serve their lord with respectful
and cheerful obedience; the employer becomes the “house-
father” who looks after the servants and maintains discipline
within the household community, and the servants and wage-
labourers become willing and grateful members of the household,
who serve God in the person of the master of the house.
Luther expounded this fundamental theory in a most excellent,
clear, cordial, and powerful way in his two Catechisms. These
two books formed the basis of Lutheran ethics, and by their
means, through a process of infinite repetition, this theory of
Patriarchalism was hammered into the minds of faithful Lutherans.
When the Catechism was expounded the explanation of the
Fourth Commandment became the centre of all social ethics, and
its teaching again helped to illuminate “The Home Table — some
texts for divers holy orders and estates, which may serve to
admonish them respecting their offices and duties”.*
Thus, down to the present day, through the Catechism
Lutheran children are taught the main features of a patriarchal
agrarian-ethic, in which they learn to “love and trust God above
all things”, and also that it is their duty “neither to despise nor
be angry with their parents and masters, but to hold them in
love and esteem”. In the Catechism, too, the Lutheran child
gives thanks to God that He “has created me and all other crea-
tures, my body and soul, my eyes and ears and all my members,
my reason and all my senses ; that He has given and still preserves
unto me clothes and shoes, house and home, wife and child,
fields and cattle, and all my goods; richly and daily He cares
for me, providing me with all nourishment for the needs of my
body and my life ; He protects me against all danger, and keeps
and preserves me from all evil; and all out of pure, fatherly,
Divine goodness and mercy ; with no merit or worthiness of my
own ; for all that I am bound to thank and praise Him, to serve
Him and obey Him ”. 266 Children of all classes learn this Cate-
chism ; in the city and in the country town, in the prince’s castle
and in the manufacturer’s villa, in the farmhouse and the
• This book accompanied the Catechism. * 66 See p. 862.
PROTESTANTISM
543
peasant’s cottage, in the tenements and model dwellings of our
great manufacturing towns. It is an epitome of the whole of the
Lutheran social ethic.
This point of view throws a light upon all the social doctrines
in particular: the Family, the State, economics, and Society. The
various forms of social life which these doctrines express, which
arise out of Natural Law, are merely so many temporary forms of
social life. They are meant to serve as the sphere in which the
religious spirit of love is to be manifested — that is, they provide
scope for the practical exercise of the spirit which springs out of
the certainty of a filial relationship with God, which is bestowed
by grace. Thus they become sections of a life-curve which is
penetrated through and through with the love of God. This is
the reason why they are not an end in themselves, and why they
may only be accepted in the spirit of obedience and surrender to
God. Even as a means for the exercise of love they are not to be
used in a humanitarian way ; they are only meant to serve as a
means of shedding abroad the spirit of love in the way which
God has ordained. This fundamental idea, however, did not
develop quite smoothly. For the forms of social life which have
arisen out of Natural Law are still meant to serve the ends of
natural life, and their independent existence becomes increasingly
obvious the more one enters into practical life. It then becomes
clear that it is impossible to absorb these natural ends purely into
the religious purpose of life. Further, the natural aims of life and
their social forms of expression in the fallen State have received
a character of law and force, of economic self-interest and of
conflict, which in their very nature are opposed to the true ethic
of love. These considerations, therefore, led to peculiar fluctua-
tions and inconsistencies in the social doctrines of Lutheranism.
Catholicism, in its graduated system, had felt the difficulties less
acutely ; but Lutheranism, with its separation between the sacred
and the secular, in a confused kind of way was bound to feel
them more intensely. Even during his own lifetime Luther
himself expressed them quite strongly. But in the period of
Lutheran orthodoxy the doctrine of the Divine character of the
natural order, of the duty of adjustment to the existing order,
predominated to such an extent that these difficulties were felt
no longer. Thus the final result was a terrible spiritual and
intellectual sterility, which formed a glaring contrast to the
social doctrines of Catholicism and of Calvinism . 257 It was,
117 On this point v. Figgis: From Gerson to Grotius, pp. 62-107, in which Luther
and Machiavelli are classed together. ^
544 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
therefore, not surprising that in the eighteenth century, when
Lutheranism was faced by the whole new world of Western
thought, its social theory broke down completely, although the
practical situation remained unchanged.
The Lutheranism of the Enlightenment produced the elemen-
tary school, freedom of inquiry and liberty of conscience, the
inwardness of ethical autonomy, and depth of feeling in philo-
sophical speculation, but it changed nothing in the social doctrines.
In practice even Kant, with his respect for authority, thought in
these Lutheran categories. They then became official and secular
in character . 2574 At the Prussian-German Restoration in the
nineteenth century these theories were revived ; they then became
a weapon in the hands of a ruling class and produced that blend
of masculine hardness and class-conscious ruthlessness which
distinguishes modern Lutheranism from the older kind.
The Lutheran Ethic and the Family
In Lutheranism, as in the Catholic tradition, the Family forms
the starting-point of all social development. It owes this position
to its origin, since it represents the earliest form of social life —
it was established in Paradise or in the Primitive State, and was
confirmed and re-ordered after the Fall, from which — either
directly or indirectly — all other forms of social life proceed. To
some extent the State is regarded as having been instituted along
with the Family, although, on the other hand, it is also regarded
as having been specially founded by God, after the peoples of
the earth had been divided into different languages and nations ;
in all this, however, the State is only conceived as the grouping
of various scattered families under one head. The Family is also
the starting-point of all economic conditions of management and
service, in so far as the most closely knit domestic economy seems
to be the ideal, and, actually, economic theory only thinks in
terms of the one-family household, and of the household of
the State, ruled by the Prince, which is conceived in a similar
manner. The Family is the germ and the precursor of the Church,
in so far as the religious fellowship within the home forms the
real bond of unity within the Family, and Church-life is first estab-
lished by the house-father through family prayers and instruc-
tion in the Catechism. Finally, the Family is the archetype of all
social organizations since it presents the original picture of those
relations of authority and reverence which arise out of the
* 87a Cf. Troeltsch: Das Historische in Kants Religionsphilosophie , 1904, pp. 37-42;
Kalpeit: Kant und die Kirche , 1904 .
PROTESTANTISM
545
natural organization. Thus it is only natural that Lutheran social
philosophy should be permeated through and through with the
spirit of the Family, understood in a monogamous patriarchal
sense.
The Family itself is an expression of the way in which the Law
of Nature regulates and solves the sociological problems which
arise out of the relation between the sexes. From the point of
view of Natural Law its aim is the ordered union of the sexes,
the ordered procreation of children, and the household which
is formed by the several contributions of the various energies and
powers mutually made, is the heart of all economic activity.
But relationships of this kind, founded by Natural Law, become
for the Christian also directly the form of the primary and most
elementary religious exercise of love, since the relations between
husband and wife, parents and children, provide the most im-
mediate opportunity for the exercise of love, and in this relation-
ship both a common self-surrender to God and the Divine
commandment of love are to be put into practice.
This means, certainly, that the sex ethic of Protestantism was
very different from that of Catholicism. Luther’s own marriage
meant more than a very manifest and concrete attempt to over-
throw the ideal of the celibacy of the priesthood ; it was also the
proclamation of a principle of sex ethics which regarded the sex-
life as something normal, and which gave it an ethical character,
making it a means of the most vital ethical and religious
functions for all believers. Luther did not conceive the purpose
of marriage solely from the point of view of the procreation and
nurture of children, as so frequently happens when a fundamen-
tally ascetic spirit is softened and adjusted to other ideals, as,
for instance, in Puritanism. From his point of view the purpose
of marriage consists in an independent value of its own, in the
love to be enjoyed by married persons, in which, however, the
specifically erotic element and the universal human element,
intensified by the common domestic life, are not combined into a
firm spiritual, ethical, and religious unity.
Thus the monogamous family solves the sex-problem in general
first of all in relation to the outside world. Sexual union before
and outside of marriage is to be avoided, and all sexual intercourse
is to be carried on within the limits of legitimate marriage. The
natural conclusion to be drawn from this is the desirability of
earlier marriage. Resolute faith in Providence sweeps away
misgivings about the size of population, and all economic diffi-
culties. Luther held that children should be brought into^he
VOL. II. o
546 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
world without any artificial restrictions whatever ; this is a positive
duty, and the possibility of being able to support a family is
certain because God wills it. In contrast with the Catholic ideal
of chastity, celibacy is regarded as only commanded for excep-
tional temperaments and circumstances — in general, however, it
is vigorously rejected. The process of making marriage ethical
from within, in the mutual relations between husband and wife,
parents and children, is only achieved by the penetration of the
whole with the religious spirit of love, which, given the existence
of a personal, religiously deepened inclination, will regulate the
sex relationships by mutual consideration for one another, which
makes the parent-relationship the school of protective and educa-
tive willing self-sacrifice, and the relationship of children to their
parents one of trustful reverence and a humble spirit of obedience
towards all who are set over them. This, of course, naturally
implies the indissoluble nature of marriage, but only as an ethical
and legal result; the sacramental character of marriage has
disappeared. Therefore when separation is desired (and this is
only permitted with great caution for any other cause save
adultery) the innocent party is allowed to marry again. The
fact that within marriage, both morally and legally, an extensive
masculine domination of a patriarchal kind is taken for granted
is due not merely to economic conditions, or to Catholic tradition ;
it belongs to the very essence of Lutheranism, which looks upon
the physical superiority of man as the expression of a superior
relationship willed by God, and a stable order as the chief end
of all social organizations. The house-father represents the law,
and possesses unlimited power over others ; he is the breadwinner,
the pastor, and the priest of his household. By submission to her
husband the wife atones for Eve’s transgression; she ought,
however, to be considered on a level of equality with him so far
as religion is concerned; to some extent this modifies her sub-
ordinate position. The modern individualistic view of marriage
is impossible because the economic, legal, and also the ethical
presuppositions do not yet exist.
Marriage in the fallen state, however, is still not regarded as
an institution which can be entirely justified without any further
argument. For Luther sexual desire and the confusing passion
which is bound up with it remain a sign of Original Sin ; in the
Primitive State there was no sensuality, and the fact that sensuality
cannot be avoided is to him the clearest proof of the universality
of sin. Thus marriage as the organization of sensuality instituted
by *God and reason is still at bottom only a frenum et medicina
PROTESTANTISM
547
peccati , a concession to sin, which God winks at, and the sin which
marriage inevitably incurs He restricts and heals. If, from that
point of view, misgivings should still arise about marriage,
Luther then appeals to the fact that it was positively founded
and appointed by God, and he defines it simply as a duty in
obedience to a Divine command. From that point of view, then,
marriage is hallowed and protected against all scruples ; indeed,
viewed from the Christian standpoint it is the most important
and the noblest social service of a Christian. Later Lutheranism,
it is true, did not give up the idea that “sexual desire” is the fruit
of Original Sin ; but its scruples gradually decreased. Here, as in
all other questions, it simply emphasized the fact of its Divine
appointment, and thus swept away all difficulties, so that Christian
marriage in accordance with Natural Law seemed to be a matter
of simple obedience to a positive Divine Command, and hence-
forth, just as in Catholicism, it was idealized as a symbol of the
relation between Christ and the Church. Problems relating to
marriage, therefore, lie solely within the sphere of marriage
legislation, and the right relationship between the religious and
the civil authority. Luther desired to hand over marriage
legislation to the State, but instead it passed into the hands of
the religious and civil authorities in the consistories — a clear
sign of the fusion of sacred and secular functions in a Christian
society which here prevailed.
Thus in this conception of the Family the various constituent
elements were in no way fully combined into a unity. Luther also
was quite conscious of the fact that this ideal of the Family was
a very high one, far removed from the actuality of life, with its
“ wiisten Rotterei und Buberei” (wild disorder and knavery). Luther
explains the fact that the reality approximates so little to this
solution of the sociological sex-problem by saying that it is due
to the corruption caused by sin, and to the specially evil character
of these Last Days. He has no doubt at all that the ideal can be
realized. The ideal only breaks down owing to the resistance of
the Devil and the lusts of the flesh, and also to greed and luxury,
which, also from this point of view, ought to be restricted by law,
in order to maintain class barriers and to stabilize the demands
of life . 258
The Lutheran Ethic and the State
The Lutheran conception of the State presents the same
characteristics as that of the Family, and the difficulties which it
*“ See p. 864.
548 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
presents are regarded from the same point of view. 269 In each case
the State has come into existence in very different ways — through
creatures as “channels” and instruments of the Divine Reason,
and in each case its existence has been confirmed and authorized
by the Gospel, above all in the 13th chapter of the Epistle to the
Romans. The State is a product of Reason, and is therefore, by
its nature, restricted to the aims of mere Reason, the preservation
of external discipline and order, and the securing of human
well-being. It is the same “police” and utilitarian idea of the
State as in Catholicism, only now, in accordance with the circum-
stances, there is a greater emphasis upon unity of authority. The
means which the State has at its disposal for this purpose is
authority, which therefore forms its most peculiar attribute,
which it always preserves, and which may not be destroyed by
any of its subjects. It is, however, the duty of the State to use this
authority according to the Divine Law of Nature and for the
purpose of reason, and if the powers that be refuse to observe
this Law, just as in scholasticism, they are to be regarded as
“tyrants”, who may be deposed from their office. According to
Luther’s own logical doctrine, however, the only resistance to
these “tyrants” which he will countenance is that of passive
resistance, or endurance, or in a case of religious persecution he
would recommend those who are oppressed to go into exile. In
this sense the State is always justified, both by Natural and by
Divine Law, even among Turks and pagans; indeed, in its
natural sense, it is even particularly excellent among pagans,
and the ancient doctrine of the State and examples drawn from
it can still be used to the profit of the State at the present day.
To this extent the State is something really Divine. Now,
however, it is its duty to establish order by force and violence
as well as by law and justice, and this is completely opposed to
the real Christian spirit of love. The Christian ought to love his
enemies and to go to law as little as possible; indeed, at first
Luther taught that no Christian should go to law at all ; later on
he conceded the right to go to law as a means of self-protection
against “knaves”, with whom it is impossible to come to an under-
standing in a Christian way. In this concession, however, there
is no ethical recognition of justice as such, whether in the form of
law, or merely as a general sense of justice. Rather it is the duty
of the Government to take the initiative in the administration of
the law and of the police force, in order to prevent a Christian
from being obliged to make too much use of the law for his own
* 269 See p. 865.
PROTESTANTISM
549
sake. There is just as little ethical value in patriotic and “Father-
land” sentiments. In cases where the Government is unchristian
a Christian must either refrain from resistance or the Government
must be changed. The truly Christian ideal is that of a pure
fellowship of love, apart from State or Law. This implies that the
State — in spite of its Divine character and its basis in Reason
— is still only an institution rendered necessary by and against
sin, a product of the merely relative Natural Law, reacting against
sin under the conditions of the fallen State. Here, then, there
reappear all the Augustinian views about the State as the product
of sin, which, however, can only be rightly understood if the
State is regarded as a product of Reason working with concessions
to sinful brutality and evil, and itself set up by Reason against sin.
From this point of view, however, the State again seems to be
something unchristian, directly opposed to a genuine Christian
ethic, and it would seem to be quite natural and justifiable for
Christian men to seek to contract out of the State, not only by
refusing to claim the aid of the State in legal matters or to take
part in military service, or in swearing an oath, etc., but also by
refusing to take part in the official administration of the govern-
ment, and in the execution of its laws. Faced by such scruples,
however (just as in the case of the Family), Luther appeals with
great emphasis to the belief that the powers that be are ordained
by God, and confirmed in their position by Him. It is a duty
of obedience towards God to exercise authority, to obey the
Government, and to use authority for the purpose of justice ; God
Himself bears the responsibility for His institutions, and does not
intend them to be interfered with by human sophistry and
argument. The practice of government and the administration
of justice are offices appointed by Divine command, and Luther
describes with great vigour the contrast between the system of
law which is carried out from the ruling prince down to the
gaoler and the hangman, in which the work of government,
administration, and punishment, including hanging, breaking
on the wheel, and beheading, is all a service to God, and the
non-official purely personal morality, in which, on the other hand,
the true service of God consists in loving one’s enemies, in
sacrifice, renunciation and endurance, in loving care for others,
and self-sacrifice.
It is very evident that he delights in the paradox of these two
ways of serving God, and he boasts with great satisfaction that
no one has yet proved so clearly from the Scriptures the Divine
Right of a government, which is independent, dominated no
550 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Church, and bewildered by no scruples. It is at this point that
Luther inserts the most characteristic and remarkable tenet in
his whole system of ethics, the distinction between private and
public morality, in which, in his own way, he had solved the great
problem which had exercised the minds and hearts of the Christian
thinkers of an earlier era. In this demand for obedience to a
positive command of God all the Augustinian conceptions of the
State disappear, and the State is regarded entirely as the Divinely-
appointed authority based on reason, whose business it is to
execute all the tasks which affect public order and the common
weal; by that very fact the State is distinct from the Church,
which is dependent solely upon spiritual influence and vital
personal fellowship.
From this point of view war also is justified. It may only be
waged by the civil authority, for secular purposes, as part of its
official duty, when it is necessary to protect the peace and welfare
of its citizens against attack. Victory can only be expected if war
is waged in self-defence. Further, war must be waged in a spirit
of humility, ascribing nothing to one’s own efforts, but all to the
Grace of God. This excludes, therefore, all ideas of “holy” wars
or Crusades ; where religious interests are involved only spiritual
weapons may be used, and even the war against the Turks may
only be waged by the Emperor as one who is called to that duty,
and then only in the secular interest of the protection of his
people. This position, however, excludes all specific political
thought and activity. Even a “secular” war must be waged for
a righteous cause, and if a Prince should undertake an unjust
oppressive war his subjects are to refuse to support him, accepting
with Christian patience the suffering they will have to endure
as the penalty for their disobedience. A just war also requires
that those who take part in it should have the right moral and
Christian spirit; they must prepare themselves by attendance
at church, for God will not grant victory to the proud. In all this
there is no question of treaties and political combinations. Every
country stands alone, and defends itself when it is threatened,
trusting in the providence of God. This is an extremely naive
kind of political idea, dependent in particular instances upon
politics of the prophetic moralizing kind. Luther is convinced
that all wars which are not undertaken in this spirit are permitted
to fail, and that Providence uses defeats as a rod of correction and
as a religious method of education. Thus the thing Luther admires
most in the Romans is that they were obliged to wage war;
ever/ one wished to force himself on them and to gain a knight’s
PROTESTANTISM
55 *
renown from them, so that they had to defend themselves ; even
Hannibal failed because he began the war, “ for it is God who
does it. He will have peace, and He is against those who begin
war and break peace”.
It is easy to see what a disastrous effect this kind of out-
look would have upon Lutheranism in the political sphere, and
although the Lutheran princes, diplomats and jurists, and later
on even Luther himself, did not bind themselves to follow this
policy, it was still everywhere a dangerous drag on Lutheran
politics ; it determined the expansion and the fate of Lutheranism,
which was unable to extend beyond the land of its birth. What
a contrast was presented by Calvinist politics, with their treaties
and alliances and their Wars of Religion . 260
When, however, we inquire into the relation of the State to
the Church, and to the life of the Christian community, we see
the question from a fresh angle. For if the State is controlled by
a Christian government, then it is no longer merely an institution
based on Divine and Natural Law through the order of Creation,
but it is one of the forms used for the realization of the Christian
fellowship of love and redemption. This means that submission
to its institutions and associations is a Christian duty of love to
the whole of Society, and indeed one of the most necessary and
immediate duties, since it is precisely the utilization of the forms
of life within the State which helps our fellow-men more than
the self-sought holiness of monastic separation from the world.
Then it becomes especially the duty of the Government, as a
service of love, to undertake the education and preservation of
Society, Christian unity of faith, discipline, and order, and also
to care for the Word of God, for purity and for the prosperity
of the Church. The Government serves the Church freely, from
love, creates its church-order and its financial basis, exercises
the office of censor and defender of the Faith, and excludes from
its sphere all expressions of false doctrine, measures which are not
required of a non-Christian government. The Turks may tolerate
several religions at the same time, but a Christian government
must place itself at the disposal of the loving service of the Truth.
Thus it will take upon itself, it is true, all kinds of secular matters,
including education and the care of the poor, but it will deal
with them all in a Christian spirit, and with consideration for the
progress of the Christian life of faith. The religious end of Society,
therefore, is exalted above the end of Natural Law, not, however,
in the Catholic sense, with its graded organization, regulated in
•••Seep. 865.
552 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
case of need by the supreme authority of the Church, but in the
sense of an agreement between the activity of the State and the
Christian exercise of love . 261 Thus we have again reached an
Augustinian idea, the idea of a Theocracy. Only this theocracy is
not a Hierocracy, not the supremacy of the international hier-
archy, and it is not a relationship which can be legally formulated ;
but it is the free agreement in love between the purely spiritual
Church built upon the Word, and the secular authority, freely
serving the Church, receiving voluntary advice from the theo-
logians; both Church and State, however, are controlled and
impelled by the Word of God, and by its miraculous and
spontaneous power, which achieves its own end.
In this question, too, Luther was fully conscious that in spite
of all his concessions to the State as an institution of fallen
humanity, he was promulgating a highly idealistic doctrine, far
removed from reality. We only have to read Luther’s Catechism
to see how the Christian ruler will desire nothing save to use his
office with all strictness, in might and right, as God’s representa-
tive to serve the cause of love and faith ; and how, on the other
hand, Christians ought to lead a humble and peaceful life, in
unlimited love and readiness to help others, without legal
proceedings or special privileges, without insistence on their
formal rights, and with the greatest possible toleration of
injustice. It is quite clear that this ideal of the State is super-
idealistic, almost utopian, in a Christian sense. On the other
hand, we only need to read his angry and vehement complaints
of princes and jurists, feudal lords and magistrates, as well as,
above all, his complaints of the masses, “so unteachable, so coarse
and brutal”, to see that Luther was far removed from the
opinion that the existing condition of things in the State corre-
sponded to his ideal. However hard he tried, in contradistinction
from the Baptists, to make his ideal fit into the conditions of
actual life, it was as little at home in this coarse and brutal world
as was his spiritual ideal of the Church, which made no provision
for its extension.
This was not due, as is often said, to Luther’s lack of political
ability, a defect which might perhaps have been remedied. It
is inherent in the religious idea itself, which cannot be combined
with the political spirit. When a fusion of this kind does take
place, the religious expression will also be different ; Calvinism is
a good example of this fact. With the modern Conservatives, who
are certainly not without the political spirit, the political element
< - See p. 865.
PROTESTANTISM
553
(which is founded upon the essence of a policy of force based
on might) and the religious element (with its spirituality which
finds its chief happiness in waiting on God) diverge so far in
opposite directions that there is a complete severance and
disharmony . 262
In the Lutheranism of more recent times the tension between
public and private morality disappeared more and more, and
there arose that type which is usually described as Lutheran:
that is, unconditional obedience towards the central government,
and the subordinate officials, both of whom represent God, and
only hold their office by virtue of God’s permission; the belief
that these authorities are based on Natural and Divine Law,
which appear more and more as the fundamental laws of a true
Christian Society, and which co-operate without difficulty ; the
duty of the Government to look after all secular and natural
affairs, and, so far as it is possible, with its secular means, and in
agreement with the ecclesiastical government, also to promote
the Christian virtues ; the preservation of external peace at any
price, and of internal peace by a thorough guardianship over the
restricted understanding of its subjects. The sinful origin and the
sinful character of law and of force disappeared in the harmony
between the Natural and the Divine Law, and this harmony
made possible an ideal of Christian Society, which, in itself, was
quite possible to realize, although it was constantly being
obscured by sin. In this ideal, revelation and natural science and
reason unite to form one great ideal of human society.
L. von Seckendorff gave classic expression to this ideal in the
dedication of his Teutschen Fiirstenstaat : “The wisdom by which
Kingdoms, Principalities, and lands are happily governed is,
according to its origin Divine, in itself glorious and incomparable,
and includes in its breadth and universality all that which in
other sciences is found only in fragments. Within the sphere of
each land it is the absolutely necessary sun, by means of which all
is illumined, warmed, and nourished. It may be compared with
an inexhaustible ocean into which all other wisdom and art
flow, and in a high and secret manner, to the welfare of all,
it is again spread abroad and shared throughout the whole land.
It is a Paradise which is ever green with all the most beautiful
and useful plants of the virtues and good ordinances, of which
each in his time and place brings forth pleasant fruits. This
wisdom King Solomon besought the only Wise God for his office
of government, by which in addition he receiveth the greatest
Sec p. 867.
554 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
treasures and riches of the world also .” 263 The pessimism and
idealism of original Lutheranism have disappeared, and the
doctrine of society bears the traces of a hearty and inwardly
strong, but homely and commonplace, paternal government.
The Lutheran Ethic and Economic Questions
Though, from the modern standpoint, the Lutheran doctrine
of the State was to a large extent far more reactionary than the
Thomist doctrine of the State, its economic ethic , 204 on the
other hand, remained considerably closer to the average Catholic
theory. It, however, also underwent great changes. These were
mainly connected with the repression of monasticism, and of
mendicancy, a practice which was closely connected with monas-
ticism, and fostered by the charity of the cloister. Further, celibacy
was considerably restricted, industry was urged upon all as a
duty, property held in perpetual tenure (mortmain) was secu-
larized, mass-benefices were abolished; above all the control of
the Church in the sphere of economics was removed, which had
brought questions like the fixing of a just price, and of usury,
before the judgment seat of the confessional. All matters of that
kind were now handed over to the secular authority entirely,
and to Natural Law. The idea of Natural Law itself, however,
whose main characteristics had already been regarded as in full
harmony with the law of Christianity by the Middle Ages and
by the Canon Law, was retained, so far as its positive content
was concerned. The only difference was that that which previously
had only been recommended to the layman in virtue of Natural
Law, was extended to all without exception, without any quarter
for beggars or for monasteries. The sphere which the Church had
formerly protected was handed over entirely to the secular system
of legislation, as something which was connected with the
Natural Law in its harmony with the Christian Law.
Thus we cannot be surprised that all the characteristic features
of the mediaeval economic ethic reappear in Lutheranism ; the
only changes are the necessary modifications caused by the social
changes of the day . 285
Labour with its toil and its cares is in itself contrary to nature.
The fruitfulness of nature and the minerals in the mountains are
IM See p. 868 . See p. 869.
1## Here also Aristotle is the master, see Schmolltr , 470, also Melancthon: CR, XVI ,
427. It is “a natural doctrine of economics”. “They approach often very close
to the physiocratic doctrines although they proceed from quite different pre-
suppositions” (Schmolltr , 471).
PROTESTANTISM
555
direct gifts of God to be humbly and gratefully received by man;
the idea that these good things can only be appropriated if labour
and technical skill are expended upon them, seems scarcely to
have occurred to Luther. The fact that God has made the acquisi-
tion of these good things dependent upon man’s toil simply means
that God has instituted labour for educative reasons, as a training
for humanity which had been corrupted by sin. Like the State,
and the institution of marriage, labour is a remedium peccati; it
belongs only to the relative Natural Law of the fallen State, and
serves the ends of punishment and discipline ; essentially, therefore,
its significance is ascetic . 286 For that very reason, however, it
should be urged as a duty upon all who are able to work. Able-
bodied beggars, idle monks, and lazy people who live on inherited
incomes are an absolute contradiction to this Law of Nature.
Private property, which is the product of labour, is also ordained
by God; it also, however, owing to the Fall, is only a means of
preserving discipline and order . 267 In special circumstances, as,
for instance, in time of famine, or for widows who cannot work,
righteousness allows man to return to the original love-commun-
ism and to allow robbery from the baker, or a “ Notwiicherleiri ’
(compulsory bargain ). 268 The standard of private property ought
not to exceed the requirements of one’s rank, yet pleasure in
possessions, even in gold and silver, is allowed within the limits
of a grateful frugality without any scrupulous consideration of
the measure of one’s needs. Since, however, it is of the very
essence of labour and of property to procure a man an income
suitable to his rank, but not to exceed it, the traditional character
of this economic ethic is obvious. The economic order consists
essentially in this : to live within one’s own class, according to the
social standards of that class, and to regard it as a just claim on
the Government to be protected by it within this order. It is
against all law, both Natural and Divine, to wish to rise in the
world, to break through existing institutions on one’s own free
initiative, to agitate and destroy Society by individual efforts, to
improve one’s manner of life, or to improve one’s social position . 269
Again, the forms of social organization which ought to be main-
tained, and which, above all, have a right to be protected and
morally recognized, are the classes which live most near to the
### Cf. specially Brandenburgs 6; Schmoller , 474 and 478; Eck , 499.
167 Passages from Luther and Melancthon in Schmoller , 703-708, 397;
Uhlhom , 22.
t## Eck : BA., IV, 1, p . 304; that is quite the Scholastic doctrine, see above,
XXVIII, 63. It certainly does not quite agree with the rest of the Lutheran
doctrine of the Primitive State. ##9 See p.^870.
556 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
natural order : the main class of feudal and peasant agriculturists
who, in direct contact with nature, produce goods without any
intermediaries between the producer and the consumer ; the class
of officials and soldiers who are needed for the natural task of
caring for the common weal, to which belong the vassals who
were liable to military service, the class of workmen in the towns
who produce goods which cannot be made by the peasantry;
day-labourers, servants, and other functionaries, who are to be
exhorted to frugality and obedience; finally also the merchant,
whose services are indispensable for exchange, who in addition
to the net cost may raise the price to one which will secure his
existence. The scholastic doctrine of the pretium justum , the
recommendation of fixed prices for food-stuffs, the scholastic
doctrine of the unfruitfulness of money, and the impossibility of
selling time, were also combined with this point of view. In all
this the continuation of the patristic and mediaeval prohibition of
usury is taken for granted ; indeed it is demanded with increased
urgency in opposition to the evasions introduced by later Scholas-
ticism; only this ought to take place without revolution, since
obligations of interest which have already been incurred are to
remain as they are until the capital is either commuted or paid
back. The system of guarantees and the system of credit are no
less hotly attacked as an intrusion into the sphere which belongs
to Divine Providence, and as frivolous presumption. These ideas
almost entirely represent the consumer’s point of view. This is
shown by the desire to establish the most direct connection
possible between the gifts of nature, labour, and consumption,
and the detestation of all complications which cannot be over-
come. It is the standpoint of those who desire law and order and
the maintenance of peace ; all labour organizations and all titles
of possession are regarded as means of preserving a social order
which is free from competition. This is required by the nature of
things, it is, however, also the demand of morality , 270 in which
Natural and Divine Law agree ; thus if this theory is carried out
in practice everyone will gain a living, order and peace will be
preserved, love will be exercised, natural distinctions maintained,
while dependence on God and on nature will be accepted in the
spirit of faith, and the welfare of the whole community will be
furthered.
870 On the “moral” tendency of this conservatism with an agrarian tendency,
see Schmoller , 476; on the “naturalness” of the retention as far as possible of
primitive methods of production and a closely knit domestic economy, see
PP- # 7 $> 5641 Oncken, 131.
PROTESTANTISM
557
The Christian sanction for this natural economic ethic consists
in this : obedient service in the callings which have just been
specified comes to be considered the first duty of a Christian,
and the true and proper sphere for exercising the love of one’s
neighbour. Since everyone ought to work and live on the proceeds
of his labour, together with the members of his household, labour
furthers the repose and harmony of the whole, and makes a most
important contribution to the welfare both of the individual and
of the community. The discharge of one’s duty by honest work
is the best service a man can render to God, and the love of one’s
neighbour which is exercised in the duties of one’s calling is
better than charity, which exalts beggary, makes almsgiving a
merit in the sight of God, while it is indifferent about the practical
effect of almsgiving, gives too much to one and too little to
another, while the whole idea is corrupted by the ideal of a
holiness consisting in “good works ”. 271 This all implies an extra-
ordinary intensification of the idea of the duty of labour, and an
impulse to increased output. Further, in spite of all Luther’s
preference for agricultural work, this is a civic idea and not a
feudal one, since the feudal nobility, which, for many reasons,
had been greatly strengthened by the Reformation, was still
urged to recognize the duty of work, of looking after their own
estates, or of princely official service. Both these elements were
forced into existence by the course of events, but they were also
a requirement of the economic ethic of the Reformation . 272 In all
these respects, in spite of the fundamentally mediaeval view of
the nature and ideal of economic life which has been retained, the
new system itself is something quite different. The universal duty
of work, the abolition of mortmain, the substitution for the
charity which tried to deal with all social evils by a social policy
of the State, and a system of philanthropy of Church and State
combined, which would care for those who were really unable
to work : these phenomena altered the whole outlook, and
certainly later on these were the features to which the modern
economic ethic was able to appeal. In itself, however, the spirit
of the economic ethic of Lutheranism was thoroughly reactionary :
it was a combination of Natural and Divine Law; it urged con-
tentment with the simplest conditions, and a toleration of the
existence minimum according to one’s class, accompanied at the
same time by the readiness, in case of need, to renounce the right
of holding property, a right which was only introduced by sin.
271 On this Christian inspiration, Schmoller , 488 t 707; Uhlhom, jgff*
272 See p. 870. x %
558 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
But although this theory seems to present a very agreeable
picture of the harmony between natural and Christian ethics,
even here the element of conflict is present. The constant fight
against self-interest, trust in one’s own strength, and confidence
in one’s own achievements, the demand for a surrendered spirit
when loss, scarcity, and distress prevail, since these things are
divine penalties and means of discipline, the emphasis upon
Providence which gives all without strain or affectation, the
brotherly love which renounces all claim on possessions — all this
goes far beyond the principles of the natural economic ethic,
and approaches the evangelical radicalism of the persecuted and
passively enduring sect. When it was suggested that if such
principles were put into practice all economic life would be
destroyed, Luther replied that it is the duty of the Government
to prevent this, but that when this does not take place, the result
must be endured as the nature of the world and the right of the
Christian. Luther waged war not only on the forms of early
capitalism and its social results which he could see quite plainly,
and possibly even against special degenerations of the new
economic organizations, but ultimately he was the champion of
the Christian ethic of frugality and love, of faith in and surrender
to Providence, against the never entirely restrained egotism and
worldly self-confidence which are implied in all desire to possess
property at all . 273 He was fighting against the new principle
itself. It is only when, in so doing, he comes very close to the
sectarian ethic that he again lays stress on the right to possess
property and its uses, on the goodness of the Divine gifts, and the
Divine authority of the Government — that is, of the whole organ-
ized social system. Here again there are the same fluctuating
points of view as there were in the questions of marriage and the
State. The dualism of Luther’s ethical system is everywhere in
evidence . 274
It is only when we realize this that we see why Luther adhered
so firmly to the economic ethic of the Middle Ages. It was not
prejudice in favour of a prevailing economic theory, which
everyone took for granted. Saxony had already developed
beyond the economic system based on agriculture ; and it is just
Luther’s passionate polemic, with its detailed enumeration of
prevailing customs, which shows that he knew that he was hostile
to the spirit of his age and not in agreement with it . 276 Nor was
it simply a bias in favour of the Catholic and scholastic tradition,
171 Sefe p. 870.
* 74 See p. 871.
,7i SchmolUr , #9.
PROTESTANTISM
559
for whenever this conflicted with his principles he was clear-
sighted enough and decidedly hostile ; indeed, in this he was not
adhering to Catholic theology, but only to its economic ethic and
to Natural Law.
Luther believed that it was possible to maintain the content
of mediaeval social teaching for reasons which may be analysed
thus : just as Luther’s peculiar political conception of Natural
Law and of force was the conscious, deliberate result of an
individualistic, and yet realistic and religiously super-idealistic,
point of view, so also his economic ethic of Natural Law and
its connection with the Christian ethic was also consciously based
on principle. Whereas in politics he consciously broke through
the tradition of the patristic Natural Law of political rationalism,
here, just as deliberately, he retained it. The reason was this :
Luther was convinced in precisely the same way as were the
Catholic ethical thinkers, that this mediaeval conception of
the economic ethic was the only one which harmonized with
the Christian’ ethic, that it alone could be combined with the
Christian ethic of love, trust in God, and renunciation of the
world. With the exception of Humanists trained in the economic
politics of the towns like Pirckheimer, Peutinger, Machiavelli,
and Vives, the majority of Luther’s contemporaries, without
confessional distinctions, were on his side. The territorial and
Imperial legislation also moved along similar lines and fought
against the resistance of the towns. We have already seen that a
Christian ethic which could accept the life of the world only
became possible within the sphere of mediaeval society and the
mediaeval system of economics — a system of economics which was
based on agriculture and on the growth of the towns with their
handicraftsmen. Luther believed that this still held good, and he
desired to maintain the basis, upon which alone the realization
of the Christian ethic had, until then, seemed possible. The
heightened passion with which he asserted the theory, and the
intensity of his ethical exhortations, was due to the fact that the
new social type of the capitalistic cities and their social results
now confronted this idea of a Christian Natural Law. This new
type with its consequences of freely mobile individualism, of
competition, of the calculating spirit which aims at increasing
its possessions, with its complicated and incalculable connections
between consumption and production, was in actual fact for the
Christian ethic, at any rate for its essential fundamental idea*,
a harsh opponent.
Luther saw this very clearly, and it was from this point ofview
5 6o THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
that he formulated his economic and ethical opposition, which,
in this respect, entirely agreed with Catholicism . 276
To this very day the social ideal and the economic ethic of the
Lutheran Conservatives still perpetuate this point of view , 277 and
in this respect they still have an affinity with the Catholic ethic,
which, however, seeks to direct the democratic element (which
it certainly recognizes far more clearly) into a new social fabric,
and within the borders of a class framework determined by the
Church. Luther’s ideas were the same as those which are still
held to-day by Catholics, Conservatives, and middle-class people
in general. Luther fought against monopolies and against joint-
stock companies, against the demand for higher wages for day
labourers and servants which was the result of the general rise
in prices , 278 against the stipulations laid down by the latter , 279
against the individualism which broke through class barriers and
sumptuary laws, just as the Conservatives of the present day fight
against the Stock Exchange, the greed of the masses, the right of
the workmen to form trade unions, and against free competition.
The difference between Luther and the Conservatives of the
present day, however, lies in this : Luther had in mind essentially
ethical and religious standards alone ; class feeling did not enter
into the question at all ; in place of that he displayed a passionate
intensity which made no effort to discover any possible scientific
explanation of the type which he hated, nor did he try to under-
stand the general reasons and necessities for the changes which
he observed. From his naive point of view these changes were
due to evil — “works of the devil” — or a Divine discipline for the
wild and unruly Germans — or they were a foreshadowing of the
End of all things . 280 Luther could not imagine that the universal
general changes in the world situation might also cause changes
in the economic and ethical sphere, and this is why he summoned
the world back to the Natural and Divine Law. The new economic
order is contrary to humility, to trust in God, to brotherly love,
to Nature, and to God. He stated plainly that in his opinion it was
now the duty of the Government, in co-operation with the influ-
encing of opinion through church and school, to intervene.
876 See p. 871.
877 Cf. Oncken: /, p. 147, who refers to A*. L. von Haller and Adam Muller .
878 Cf. Schmoller y 513. 878 Gf. Schmoller , 5/5.
880 An example of the naive character of his arguments in Schmoller , p. 366:
that seven, eight, nine, and ten per cent, are unchristian is proved by the
fact “^Jhat robbers and usurers who take that rate of interest frequently die a
violent death or otherwise perish miserably”.
PROTESTANTISM
561
Social Ideal of Luther
The whole social ideal of Luther — the organization and
construction of Society in general — is finally explained by political
and economic and ethical ideas. As in mediaeval Catholicism, it
was the ideal of the social hierarchy, as a “cosmos of callings” ;
the only difference is that the duty of the “calling” is now extended
to all, which involves the direct incorporation of the idea of
“the calling” into the very heart of Christian ethics. The “call-
ings” are in part those which proceed from the economic organiza-
tion of Society, in which a rigid guild organization would be
desirable. In part they are vocations to the Church and to the
work of education, to which (as is constantly repeated) it is a
Christian duty to lead talented children. Then there are the
callings of the prince, the noble, the official, the soldier, and, las>t
of all, the surplus of those who cannot find a place within the
established organization, but who can still be used to serve in
various ways as they are needed . 281 Serfdom, which had not
ceased to exist, and which was extended at the close of the six-
teenth century, from this point of view was regarded in precisely
the same way as slavery was regarded in the Early Church, as
a class, that is, in which men may enjoy the inner liberty of
Redemption, but in which they have no right to seek external
legal freedom . 282 In Lutheranism there was no idea at all of any
new anti-slavery movements, and even down to the present day
neither agrarian nor industrial serfdom raises any kind of mis-
giving in its mind. The reason for all this is perfectly clear. The
social hierarchy does away with competition, so far as that is
possible in the fallen state, and in so doing it harmonizes both
with the ideal of love, and with the ideal of Natural Law which
aims at law and order. It is in this sense that Stahl has made a
new defence of the class theory as part of the theory of Christian
Natural Law . 283 A blind faith in Providence assures the com-
munity that a principle of this kind would meet all the needs of the
whole population. This system can only be disturbed by unusual
accidents and Divine chastisements ; when this happens those
whose lives have been thrown out of gear by these events are
commended to the care of Christian philanthropy, and to the
care of the civil authority, firmly believing that these methods
will suffice to heal all social evils . 284 At bottom, no one doubts that
the Government can achieve all this, provided that it obeys con-
181 See p. 871. 882 See p. 871. 288 See ft 872.
184 Cf. von Seckendorff: Fiirstenstaat, p. 193. %
VOL. n. H
56a THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
scientiously both the Law of Nature and the Law of God : that is,
the characteristic difference between this point of view and that
of the present day. The reason for this lies partly in the fact that
in reality conditions were — in a quite remarkable way — much
simpler than they are now; partly, owing to the lack of all
statistical information, there was a total absence of scientific
knowledge of the complicated character of the social situation,
which was conditioned by and dependent on so many different
factors ; the right of location did not yet exist, and the problem
of population had only just begun to appear as a subject for
discussion. Hence a naive conception of that kind was possible.
The later theological ethic therefore, on the side of its social
theories, was simply concerned with the vocational system as a
whole ; in particular it dealt only with the question of the family
and the household, which, it felt, ought to constitute the chief
sphere for the development of the ethical virtues of Christianity.
The regulation of the whole is left to the Government, which,
strongly supported by Lutheranism, takes supreme control. It
is then the duty of the Government to see to it that in harmony
with Christian and Natural Law the different classes are main-
tained in their suitable way of living, that social evils are remedied,
and that whatever progress is necessary, is achieved. These matters
come under the province of political economy and police
administration ; thus the Lutheran theory merges into mercan-
tilism, since, where the good of the community is concerned, the
Government is permitted to do that which is forbidden to the
individual, that is, to gain an increase of property and profit,
to initiate new industrial enterprises, monopolies and royalties,
immunities, and alterations in the social structure and its com-
pulsory character. In connection with this subject Seckendorff
has given a classic description of the Christian “police”. 285
Social Policy, Social Reform,
and Philanthropy
When we gather up all these various particulars and summarize
them it then becomes possible to answer the question: to what
extent did Lutheranism attempt to mould Society according to
Christian ideals, or to introduce a scheme of social reform? The
answer is simpler than we would expect when we consider that
Lutheranism has been interwoven with an amazingly varied
social history. Lutheranism has been mainly interwoven with a
sociaJL process which extends from the advanced stage of the
* #i4 See p. 87a.
PROTESTANTISM
563
German civilization of the sixteenth century, through the desola-
tion of the Thirty Years War, the formation of the German
States, and finally, through the politics of the Enlightenment and
the Restoration periods, down to the great social problems of the
present day. The simplicity of the answer is due to the fact that
down to the present time the Lutheran position is based essentially
upon the religious theory of the purely spiritual nature and
“inwardness” of the Church, while all external secular matters
are handed over to reason, to the ruling Princes, to the civil
authority. At the beginning, certainly, there was combined with
that the assumption that Natural and Divine Law, both issuing
from the same source, will always naturally supplement each
other, and that a Christian government will always desire and
be able to govern and to mould secular affairs in harmony with
Natural and Divine Law, in the spirit of the religious and
ethical ideal.
The idea of moulding Society according to Christian ideals
certainly existed ; but it was left entirely to the Government, to
be carried out in accordance with natural reason, which har-
monized with the Gospel and was adapted to the fallen state.
When, however, the modern conception of Natural Law arose
which differed from the Christian Natural Law of the fallen
state and of its comparative harmony with reason, then certainly
a new situation had been created. Lutheran thinkers found a
solution by accepting the new Natural Law just as they had
accepted the old, seconding the reforming activity of the State
with a partially secularized religious enthusiasm: when, more-
over, the political and social development, which had also been
emancipated from this idea, passed into the modern conditions
of the pure struggle for power and of competition, then the social
theory of Lutheranism was in a position of great embarrassment ;
henceforth it could only preach its doctrine, with scarcely a hope
of realizing it, since, unlike Catholicism and Calvinism, Lutheran-
ism possessed no organ by which it could put its theories into
practice apart from the State, and the modern State, for its part,
no longer feels itself— as in early Lutheranism — to be the secular
aspect of the organism of Christian Society. This was the beginning
of the social impotence of Lutheranism, in so far as it has not
adopted Calvinistic and modem ideas. In its actual primitive
sense it only finds support among the Conservatives; and it
therefore combines its dogmatic renewal with the political and
social views of the Conservatives. Its hopes of a social transforma-
tion in accordance with Natural and Divine Law are pinnecl 90
564 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
longer to the Christian State, but to the Christian Party. As we
can understand very well, this brings Conservative Lutheranism
into touch with the other Christian Party— against which it had
once fought so ardently — that of Catholicism, in a community of
“Christian world-outlook 5 ’, and of opposition to the modern
militaristic and bureaucratic sovereign State, with its indifference
towards the Church and religion in general.
At first, however, Luther did not exhort the Church to this
passive attitude in social questions. At the moment when the
seething ferment of German life came into touch with the reform
of religion, and when it seemed as though this combination were
about to lead to the goal of a Christian commonwealth, renewed
in its political, social, and Church-life, Luther, in his appeal To
the Christian Nobility of the German Nation , outlined a programme of
ecclesiastical and socio-political reform for the whole Empire, in
which he had interwoven all the suggestions which had come
from the opposition and the reform parties with his new ecclesi-
astical ideal of a Church based upon the priesthood of all believers.
In this treatise, however, Luther was carried farther than he
intended by the impetus of the whole movement ; and even here
his theory was foreshadowed, to this extent, that he does not
suggest that the spiritual authority should bring about the
reforms and thus impose on the nation a new Christian law, but
that the princely rulers alone are to bring about the reforms
outside the Church, in the strength of reason and love for the
pure Gospel.
“Reasonable Regents alongside of Holy Scripture 55 — these are
the separate powers, which, however, each within its own sphere,
work together for the reform “of the Body of Christ 55 . But an
enthusiastic optimism still conceived both tasks as essentially
united and destined to achieve a common victory . 286 After these
preparations had been made a General Council would then
finally take in hand the reform of Christendom as a whole.
Nothing came of this idea of a collective reform, so in the times
of ferment the Reformation movement turned to the particular
local and communal authorities, which each in its own way
undertook the work of “social betterment 55 , and during this
experimental period they were supported by Luther’s “group-
ideal 55 . The municipalities and the magistrates, who already
possessed considerable ecclesiastical rights, and a tradition of a
186 Cf. Brandenburg , pp. gff. ; for the origin of thoughts of reform in one who,
until, then, had been exclusively occupied with theology see fV. Kdhler : L. 9 s
Sohrijft an den Adel im Spiegel der Kultur - und Zeitgeschichte , 1895-
PROTESTANTISM
565
kind of ethical “police” supervision, now issued new regulations,
which made arrangements for the system of public worship,
administration of the Poor Law, and the organization of the
police force in the new Protestant sense. The Wittenberg Ordin-
ance of January 1522, and the Leisnig Ordinance of 1523, were
endeavours (which have often been imitated) to institute a
Christian social order which was to use the money formerly
locked up in endowments and benefices for the benefit of church
and school, for poor relief in general, and also in time of famine,
and which desired to leave the administration of these funds in
the hands of elected stewards of Church revenues. These “ordin-
ances” were based on similar police organizations in the towns,
which had previously exercised similar powers, but they were
coloured by the evangelical Protestant Church spirit, and this
ecclesiastical flavour certainly entitled them to be described as
Christian Socialism on local and communal lines. These “ordin-
ances” were, however, Utopian and visionary, and they were never
carried out in practice. 287 Indeed, under the influence of the
disillusionment of the Peasants’ War, and with the possibility
which had now arisen of instituting a new order on territorial and
not on local lines, Luther turned away from the dubious “group-
ideal” altogether, and henceforth, in accordance with his essential
main idea, he handed over all political and social matters, as
external secular affairs, entirely to the Government, to reason,
and to the jurists, that triad which he praised as much as he
scolded it! With his eyes open Luther now maintained that the
Church ought to dominate solely the purely spiritual spheres of
edification and instruction. Under the influence of the Gospel, he
argued, a Christian Government should then be able to settle
all social questions which appeared on the horizon of that day
on its own authority. These social questions were mainly con-
cerned with the problem of the support of those who, for some
reason or another, were unable to earn their living within the
social hierarchy, conceived as a system of “callings”.
#87 Cf. Uhlhorn , III, 33-51; Barge: Karlstadt , I, 352 , 382-386; above all, L.
Feuchtwanger : Geschichte der sozialen Politik und des Armenwesens im Zeitalter der
Reformation , Berliner Diss., igo8 , and its continuation in the Jahrbuchfur Gesetz -
gebung, Verwaltung, und Volkswirtschaft, igog , XXXIII. In essentials I follow
Feuchtwanger , who very considerably supplements and corrects the work of
Barge ; cf. the analyses of the Wittenberger “ Beutelordnung ”, of the “ Ordnung der
Stadt Wittenberg ”, and of the Leipziger “ Kas tenor dnung”, Diss.,pp. g-16. Cf. also
K. Milller: Luther und Karlstadt , igoj (Appendix), and Barge: Die alteste evangelische
Armenordnung , Hist . Vierteljahrsschrift , XI, igo8, pp. igs-225, and ITheolog.
Jahresbericht , XXVIII , p. 530 . •
566 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
This might have been the end of all direct ecclesiastical social
activity, and the beginning of a policy of purely secular social
welfare and care of the poor. The territorial Princes, however,
whose authority was still far from being centralized, and the
communes (free cities) which were burdened with heavy tasks,
undertook this vocation very imperfectly. Luther’s helpers there-
fore intervened, above all Bugenhagen, who was a good organizer,
and they took over the task of the care of the sick and the poor,
which lay so near to the heart of the Church. This service was
undertaken, however, no longer in the Utopian, Christian-
Socialist spirit of the “Ordinances” of Wittenberg and Leisnig,
but — and in this matter it was essentially the towns which were
concerned— in a very matter-of-fact combination of communal-
police activity and the ecclesiastical activity of pastoral work and
of charity. In accordance with municipal organizations for the
care of the poor in the towns, and under the stimulus of the
reform of the Poor Law by Ludovico Vives, which started in
Belgium, the means were created out of endowments, the poor
were controlled by the co-operation of the spiritual and the
secular authorities, vagabondage was restricted, hospitals were
created, and a fixed system of book-keeping was introduced in
which particular care was taken to avoid the confusion caused
by mixing up these accounts with those which belonged to the
administration of the Church and to education. In the end,
however, these new “ordinances” for administering the funds
from the “common chest” were not carried out permanently.
This was partially due to the fact that the problems connected
with the Poor Law had been underestimated, and partially also
to their failure to centralize the endowment monies which they
did control ; another cause was the lack of voluntary officials who
could serve in turn upon the board of administration ; above all,
however, the new religion itself was too much engrossed with the
personal interior life, too much imbued with the idea that every-
one ought to work, and too much alienated from the old ideal of
charity, to succeed in creating the necessary new methods. Thus
the Lutheran “Chests” ( Kasten or funds) merely became meagre
funds in support of the poor alongside of other similar institu-
tions . 288
Thus, in this form also, ecclesiastical Socialism came to nothing,
and the task of caring for the common weal was entrusted to the
various governments, which were becoming more and more
,M Cf. JJhlhom, III, 102-140, and Feuchtwanger: Geschichte der sozialen Politik tmd
des*Armenwesens im Zeitalter der Reformation , Berliner Diss ., 1908.
PROTESTANTISM
567
centralized, and were increasingly taking control of all the
interests within their sphere; these governments, however, felt
that the ecclesiastical arrangements for poor relief relieved them
of responsibility, and they therefore did nothing on their side.
But, still, the permanent principle had been finally formulated :
that all secular and political affairs, and therefore also the question
of social welfare, belong to the province of the Government, while
the Church is concerned solely with the salvation of the soul and
the interior life of personal piety.
Thus the Lutheran social programme merged into the social
politics of patriarchal mercantilism. Then, when the State
accepted the modern movement of thought, and moved away
from a patriarchal Absolutism to an Absolutism of the Enlighten-
ment, the whole system of Christian social effort slipped into the
modern policy of social welfare, and Lutheranism lost all inner
connection with, and all influence upon, the Government, which
was certainly far from being a “Christian” government.
The more, however, that the social policy became purely
secular, and the more clear it became that a purely class and
vocational system does not enable everyone to gain their liveli-
hood, but that it was always surrounded by a multitude of people
who had become declassis , and of people in distress, and especially
when the more restless social movement of modern life brought
bewilderment and confusion into many lives, Lutheranism was
obliged to give up its attitude of simple trust in Providence and
in the vocational system ; and the Christian desires to express love
which it did possess were again exercised in the form of voluntary
philanthropy, in institutions, fellowships, clubs, and charities.
Under the influence of Pietism, Lutheranism returned to the
religious-social policy of charity, without the glorification of
mendicancy, and at first without permitting this practice of
charity to have any connection with the Church ; in every other
respect, however, this meant the resumption of the charity of
Catholicism and of the Early Christian Church . 289 This has been
the position ever since, and, under English influences, during the
nineteenth century, as the “Innere Mission” (Home Mission)
movement, this Christian social service has developed and
flourished in a quite remarkable way. Orthodox ecclesiastical
Lutheranism has only taken part in this movement in a rather
hesitating way, but it has to-day finally become fairly sympathetic
to it as a whole. Strict Lutheranism, which was renewed at the
time of the Restoration and which has since then been dominant,
See p. 873. *
568 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
refused to entertain any further ideas of social reform. It has
maintained the position which Stahl represented, i.e. that the
social order should be entrusted to a Christian Government,
whose duty it should be to ensure the maintenance of the class
organization of callings with the restriction of the modem life
movement. Wichern’s attempt to go beyond the mere exercise of
charity and to introduce a Christian social reform from the side
of the Church, and in the grand manner to combine organically
an ecclesiastical religious philanthropy with the social policy of
the State, broke down because Lutheranism was unprepared,
inwardly, for action of this kind, and also because his ideas were
captured by the Conservative reactionary party . 290 The trans-
formation of the programme of Wichern by Stocker only led to
the demand for a greater independence and power for the Church,
and thus to an imitation of modern Catholic social reform ; other-
wise, so far as the general social ideal was concerned, it was
obliged to connect itself with Conservative and middle-class
principles in the true Lutheran sense; its rejection by the Con-
servatives finally drove it back into very small groups . 291
Thus, down to the present time, the Lutheran Church has
never advanced farther than the renewed ideal of charity ; it has
never made any effort to initiate a real social transformation at
all. Most Lutherans simply repeat the old doctrine of the inward-
ness of the Church and of the duty of leaving all external matters
of legislation and social welfare to the State . 292 Others, like the
Christian Socialists of the Naumann school, discard the principles
of Lutheranism altogether, and feel forced to return to the
general political, economic, and social foundations of present-day
Society . 293 Others, like those who represent the point of view of
the Evangelical Social Congress, fully aware that the situation
has entirely changed, discuss from differing points of view the
possibility of striking out along new paths . 294
Wherever the earlier Lutheranism is still a real force — among
the Conservatives, that is to say — all social reform consists in
breaking up the rationalistic, individualistic nature of modern
Society, and in the revival of a society organized on aristocratic
lines, bound together by class bonds, i.e. in the struggle against
the Liberal world-outlook, and against the creations of Liberalism
in the political, economic, and social sphere ; alongside of this,
then, the “Innere Mission” (Home Mission) may indeed exercise
its charitable activity among the poor and the sick, but it must
,t0 Seep. 873. 191 See p. 874. t9% See p. 874.
PROTESTANTISM
569
guard against any possibility of shattering the idea of authority . 296
Within these limits the “Innere Mission * 5 has certainly achieved
splendid things, although the Christian-social element certainly
predominates less within it than the propaganda and the evangel-
istic element . 2964
The Lutheran Ethio
and the General Situation
This completes the analysis of Lutheranism. Now, however, we
have to answer the final question: to what extent are these
social doctrines the reflection of existing political and social
conditions? So far as the actual ideal is concerned which floated
before the minds of Lutheran thinkers, we must give a directly
negative reply to this question. The social doctrines of Lutheran-
ism are, like the whole of Lutheran piety, a genuine branch of the
whole Christian religion and ethic of love, which either rejects or
is indifferent to the world, with its law, property, might, and
force, and of that monotheism which proclaims that the religious
aims of the personality united to God are the only true and lasting
values of life, and from that derives the idea of the union of man-
kind in love, through the common exercise of these values. To a
far greater extent than Catholicism, certainly, Protestantism has
accepted the life of the world, and it is therefore similarly deter-
mined by the spirit of general social development, which forced
itself upon the attention of the Church and found itself in a
situation in which this was possible without any particular
difficulty. In so doing, however, Protestantism has carefully
preserved the dualism of the Christian ideal which arises out of
this conception, and which, in contrast with Catholicism, it has
both deepened and intensified. Since Protestantism supported the
mediaeval ideal of a social hierarchy and the anti-capitalistic
spirit, expressed in agrarian and middle-class ways of living, along
with a patriarchalism based on authority and reverence, as the
right way of reconciling both sides, it drew its conclusions from
the ethical and religious ideal, and not from the circumstances
which happened to prevail at the time. If we reflect upon Luther’s
idealistic plans, and remember his bitter complaints of the non-
Christian character even of the new Protestant evangelical world,
we receive far more the impression of a Christian Utopia than
of the justification and glorification of existing conditions, and not
without reason. One of the finest and most original Lutheran
"•Seep. 875. v .
s»u Qf t Schafer : Leitfaden der inner en Mission 8 , 1893, and Uhlhom: Liebestatigkeit .
570 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
thinkers, J. V. Andrea, has described Luther’s social ideal (in
imitation of Sir Thomas More and Campanella) in a Utopia,
called Christianopolis . 296
Whenever the social doctrines of Lutheranism are treated
solely as the religious sanction of the existing situation, as often
happens in orthodox Lutheranism, this always means that
Lutheran thought has been weakened and despiritualized ; the
main impulse of the real Lutheran ethic in its mystics and spiritual
thinkers, in its ethical reformers, and finally in the Pietists, has
always reacted against this tendency with great vigour. By the
very vigour of its protest, however, this opposition often lost its
connection with the real leading ideas of Lutheranism, and
landed in the other extreme of asceticism. The same applies to
the exaltation of Luther’s doctrine of the “calling”, which is a
favourite idea of writers of modern books on the subject, which
they try to interpret as a certain religious consecration and sanc-
tion of modern civilization. It is not due to thoughtlessness,
therefore, when the idea is suggested that modern civilization
means essentially an anti-Catholic freedom from sacerdotalism
and from monasticism, and that otherwise it is a conservative
middle-class restriction or weakening of the modern life-move-
ment . 297
The religious and ethical ideas of Lutheranism are not a
glorification and intensification of definite class and power
interests by means of a world outlook based upon those interests.
This might perhaps apply to the peculiarly irrational idea of
Natural Law which enabled Lutheranism to accept the existing
conditions of authority, regarding the Law of Nature as though
these conditions of authority, together with sin and inequality,
were all part of the unchanging Divine Order, to which the soul
(which remains inwardly free) gives itself up to labour and to
endure. The reason for this lay, at least originally, and in Luther
himself, not in any kind of class interest, but in the authoritative
conservative temperament of Luther himself, and in his peculiarly
penetrating conception of the nature of authority and power,
as well as the essential inequality of the fundamental elements in
all human social groupings. In this he is only perpetrating the
Cf. Joh. Val. Andreae: Reipublicae Christianopolitanae description Strassburg , i6ig.
The spirit of the whole is decided Lutheran. The communism is taken over
from the Utopias of the Humanists (private property and the aristocratic
constitution are carefully maintained), but the whole is balanced by the
principles of Lutheranism ; cf. also E. Ehrhardt: Un Roman Social Protestant au
jybns s i£i e , Paris y Fischbacher , 1908. 1,7 See p. 876.
PROTESTANTISM
57i
patriarchal side of the scholastic Natural Law , 298 while he discards
the individualistic rationalistic elements. This, however, is the
reason why Luther also called these elements directly unchristian
and the product of sin, and he only recognized them as a Divine
institution within the sphere of sinful reason, under the impression
of their unalterable nature and their absolute necessity. He was
only able to combine this idea of Natural Law with his own
general Christian idea by inculcating the spirit of humility, trust
in God, readiness to suffer, and the fact that man, owing to the
taint of Original Sin, deserves to be punished. When, later on,
this idea of Natural Law was used simply to justify existing
conditions, and the chief heirs of the Lutheran spirit at the
present day, the Conservatives, developed this Natural Law into
an aristocratic naturalism which is related to Darwin’s doctrine
of selection and to Nietzsche’s ethic of the Super-Man, these are
certainly applications of the idea in the interest of political and
social domination, in which they display their flagrant opposi-
tion to the real Christian ideas and their “class” spirit. Further,
this inconsistency is not usually apparent to most people, since
they conclude that the non-Christian character of those prin-
ciples is due to the situation created by sin, and therefore they
do not merely retain them in spite of their unchristian character,
but they are convinced that they ought to use them, as results of
inequality and means of repression willed by God against the
individualistic atomistic evil . 299 This theory also undoubtedly
contains right views about the “nature” of man, and it contains
no less incontrovertible ethical values in the ideas of obedience and
of authority, just as in patriarchalism itself. 299 * Thus here also the
ultimate cause is the old ideological basis, which only nowadays is
so visibly useful to “the sectional interests” and is now associated
with them to make some thoroughly impure combinations.
It is more difficult to answer the opposite question: What
influence has Lutheranism had upon social history? Here, from
the very outset, we must distinguish between the effects of its
spiritual individualism, which manifest themselves plainly in the
spiritual and ethical development of German culture right down
to Kant and Goethe, and which has left traces of its influence in
the idea and development of family life, and in the realm of
political, social, and economic institutions . 300 It is essentially the
latter with which we are here concerned.
Cf. above, pp. 285-288,
1,9 Cf. the numerous illustrations from modern Conservative liteAture in
Stillich, pp. 30-50. ,Ma See p. 876. 300 See p. $76.
572 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
The gist of the matter is this: in itself the late mediaeval
tendency in the development of the State and the general social
classification was not altered by Lutheranism. The only changes
were the disappearance of the priesthood, which was replaced
by the Protestant ministry, as well as the abolition of the supreme
control by the Church, and the establishment of the system of
purely State control which took its place ; the process of secular-
ization and the abolition of monasticism were also changes which
cut deeply into the social fabric, but they did not initiate new
social developments. The social fabric was more profoundly
affected by the rise of a Humanistic educated class, which was
encouraged by the didactic character of the new religion, and its
close connection with education ; yet this was rather an effect of
Humanism combined with the Reform Movement than an effect
produced by the religious spirit itself . 801
Its political influence was more central. This does not mean
that Lutheranism developed a new idea of the State, or even
created a new State; but, by its renunciation of ecclesiastical
independence, by its deification of the Government and its loyal
passivity, it provided a most favourable setting for the develop-
ment of the territorial State, which was then engaged in the
process of self-development. It smoothed the way for territorial
absolutism; to the feudal lords of the manor it made easier the
development of the manorial estate with its privileges and the
growth of a new kind of serfdom , 302 and it fostered the patriarchal
attitude and the corporate class spirit.
In relation with foreign countries, however, the same Lutheran
spirit hindered the action and expansion of the various States,
and finally caused terrible defeats. Its only service to the actual
modern State has been to encourage the spirit of absolutism;
once that was supreme, however, it became strong enough to
strike out on a modern line of its own, and it has thus gone far
beyond the Lutheran principles of peace, protection, and punish-
ment based on Natural Law as well as the duty of the Govern-
ment to promote Christian charity.
The influence of Lutheranism in the economic sphere has been
equally indirect. Here its essential spirit is that of traditionalism
and agrarian middle-class production, which, by means of
corporate solidarity, excludes competition, as far as possible
#01 Cf. Wittich : Deutsche und FranzHsische Kultur im Elsass , igoo , a work which goes
far beyond its explicit subject.
802 On 4 his point, see detailed illustrations in Drews: Der Einfluss der Gesell-
schqftlichen %ustande.
PROTESTANTISM
573
combining simplicity in one’s requirements with simplicity of the
conditions of production and consumption. Since it also abolished
mendicancy, urged the masses to work, and by its individualism
stimulated individuals, even on the non-religious side, and
created a certain elasticity of mind by its system of education
(which at first certainly only affected the middle classes), it has, in
spite of everything, helped to develop economic life in a more
vital way. Here, however, also the chief element in the whole
process was the making of the secular authority independent,
which, entrusted with social welfare and exalted to supreme
power, introduced Western methods of production, and in so doing
it profited by the fact that the Lutheran sections of the popula-
tion were more inclined to work hard than the rest. Otherwise it
was not for nothing that mercantilistic rulers introduced Calvinist
or Pietist settlers wherever they wished to raise the level of trade
or manufactures. The modern economic situation — even in the
modest range which it had attained in Germany until the nine-
teenth century — has been created by the State, and is not due
to the influence of Lutheranism . 303 Lutheranism opposed the
modern development of the State only one degree less ardently
than Catholicism.
Finally, so far as its main social tendencies are concerned, and
its theoretical conception of Society, Lutheranism has always
represented the principle of patriarchalism and conservatism.
This was caused in part by the fact that the fundamental religious
temper of trust in God and distrust of human effort and industry,
the relation of the sense of sin with suffering and endurance, in
itself tended to foster a conservative spirit, and in part by the
fact that the bases of the earlier social constitution, with its class
organization and the greater simplicity of the relation to the
Divine gifts of Nature, are firmly retained by Lutheranism as the
presupposition of its ethical ideals. Thus Lutheranism is inclined
to endure existing conditions humbly and patiently, even when
they are bad, and to glorify them when they agree with those
earlier ideals. If, speaking generally, the Protestant countries are
the most progressive at the present time, we must not forget,
on the other hand, that during the period when the Protestant
churches were being formed the mother-lands of modern civiliza-
tion — Italy, France, and Spain — were Catholic, and that their
exhaustion has no connection with their Catholicism — that, thus,
on the other hand, the Protestant countries too, and especially the
Lutheran, cannot in any case ascribe their present position
808 See p. 877.
574 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
primarily to their religious bases, however important these may be
in particular . 804
The passivity of Lutheranism involved the habit of falling back
upon whatever power happens to be dominant at the time. When
it was suggested that this attitude left Christians at the mercy of
every rogue and brutal tyrant, Luther replied that the Govern-
ment ought to see that this did not happen, and that if it failed to
prevent it, then certainly the Christian must simply suffer for it.
Thus everywhere Lutheranism came under the influence of the
dominant authority. The yielding spirit of its wholly interior
spirituality adapted itself to the dominant authority of the day.
This meant, however, that the form Lutheranism took was con-
trolled by the various forms of government with which it was
connected. It had no theoretical tendency towards monarchism or
absolutism at all 805 ; this theory was only an invention of the
modern Conservatives. It was only because absolutism and the
system of manorial estates arose in Central and North Germany
that it there developed the loyal spirit which characterizes
Ostelbiertum .* In the Imperial towns it glorified aristocratic-
republican rule. In Wiirttemberg, where there was no corre-
sponding nobility, although it held the ruling prince in all honour,
it did not hinder bourgeois and peasant democratic ideas, but
even fused itself with them. In the military national State of
Sweden it justified the aggressive policy of Gustavus Adolfus, and
in the class struggles in the Austrian territories it justified the rise
of the Lutheran nobility 306 ; in Denmark and Norway a very
firmly established peasant democracy is to-day united most closely
304 Cf. on the whole subject, Troeltsch: Die Bedeutung des Protestantismus fur die
Entstehung der modernen Welt , igo6 (see also Hist. %eitschrift , 1905). Haendtke
shows the severance of general civilization from the specific Lutheran presup-
positions while retaining their formulas.
805 Cf. Brandenburg , p. 18. Luther replied to the question why God has created
authorities of so many different kinds by saying: “Is God obliged to give
chapter and verse to such useless fools why He wants to have it thus?” Also
radical monarchical Divine Right as is taught by Horn in his Politicorum pars
architectonica de civitate Traj. a. Rh., 1664 (analysed by von Gierke: Althusius , a
p. jo f.) is not genuinely Lutheran, but it has grown up out of opposition to
the Calvinistic doctrine of contract and is filled with the ideas of princely
absolutism.
* Translator. — I.e. the Nationalist spirit, which is the distinctive feature
of the landed aristocracy in the agricultural districts east of the Elbe.
806 Thus, for example, Bernhard von Weimar was able to justify from the religious
point of view his brigandage as “a royal calling” ( Haendtke f p . 19). Gustavus
Adolfus was politically an admirer of the quite un-Lutheran Hugo Grotius ,
whose jfoief work he always carried about with him ; H. G. : Recht des Krieges und
Friedens y Phil . Bibl. /j, p. 8.
PROTESTANTISM
575
with a sturdy Lutheranism, which is certainly tinged with Pietism ;
and in America the most orthodox Lutheranism one can imagine
flourishes under the wing of democracy.
We must, however, admit that by its very nature Lutheranism
adapts itself most easily to political conditions of a monarchical
and aristocratic kind, and to an economic social situation which
is predominantly agrarian and middle class. Hence it has found
its strongest form of expression in the politics and world-outlook
of the Prussian and German Conservatives, through whom to-day
Lutheranism still helps to determine the destinies of the German
people.
Social and Political Significance of Lutheranism
In the aggressive position which, after the eighteenth century
had culminated in the French Revolution, the older spiritual
forces again adopted towards the modern world, and in which
they, with the union of ideological and practical politico-social
powers, advanced victoriously against the new world, the restora-
tion of Prussian-German Lutheranism was one of the most im-
portant events in social history . 307 It united with the reactionary
movement the monarchical ideas of agrarian patriarchalism,
of the militaristic love of power ; it gave an ideal to the political
Restoration and its ethical support. For this reason, then, it in its
turn was supported by the social and political forces of reaction,
by all the means of power at their disposal. Finally, Lutheranism
of this type hallowed the realistic sense of power, and the
ethical virtues of obedience, reverence, and respect for authority,
which are indispensable to Prussian militarism. Thus Christianity
and a Conservative political attitude became identified with each
other, as well as piety and love of power, purity of doctrine, and
the glorification of war and the aristocratic standpoint. Thus all
attempts at Church reform were suppressed along with the world
of Liberal thought; the representatives of modern social and
spiritual tendencies were forced into an attitude of strong hostility
to the Church, and all whose sympathies were Christian and
religious were enlisted on the Conservative side. As an essential
element in the forces of the Restoration, Lutheranism played an
important part in the political and military development of
German Prussia which arose out of the forces of the Restoration ;
and it was thus in violent opposition to all those other elements
which worked together to produce a new Germany, the demo-
cratic-union elements and modem social and economic Vnove-
»” Sec p. 878. ,
576 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
ments. Along with the international Catholic Restoration policy
which was akin to it, and yet so very different from it, and with
which it is in contact, sometimes friendly, sometimes hostile —
Lutheranism occupies the key position of the mpst difficult and
pregnant problems affecting the life of Germany, and does its
part towards widening the gulf between the forces which support
the patriarchalism of the Restoration and those which support
the cause of democracy and progress, a gulf in which all moderate
attempts at reconciliation are drowned ; the longing to bridge over
this gulf in Germany with a Christian-Social programme was
an idealistic and praiseworthy but fleeting and swiftly refuted
dream.
For the great majority of orthodox Christians in Germany the
traditions and the spiritual constitution of Lutheranism made any
such reconciliation impossible; and on the other hand, the un-
restrained hatred towards the Church which characterized all
progressive and democratic elements belonging to that group of
movements also made any kind of union impossible. Thus Luther-
anism naturally does little towards building up a new social
structure. In the main its efforts are confined to the philanthropic
activity of the Home Mission Movement ; otherwise its tendency
is to alleviate but not to re-create. Wherever the Christian-Social
ethic and social policy strikes out in another direction we may be
sure that other influences are at work than those of genuine
Lutheranism. As a rule these influences are due to Calvinism, and
thus we come to the second great confessional structure of Pro-
testantism: Calvinism.
3. CALVINISM
Calvinism and Lutheranism contrasted
After a period of initial success Lutheranism ceased to advance.
This must be attributed, in the main, to its stress on personal
piety, its acceptance of the existing situation, its acquiescence
in the objectivity of the means of grace, as well as to its lack
of capacity for ecclesiastical organization, and its non-political
outlook. It was the destiny of Calvinism to extend the Reforma-
tion of the Church throughout Western Europe, and thence out
into the New World, and, actually, Calvinism is the chief force
in the Protestant world to-day.
Tty, primary reason for this wide-spread extension of Calvinism
was the fact that it gained a footing among the Western nations
PROTESTANTISM
577
at a time when they were passing through a great process of
political development. There is, however, a deeper reason, and
one which lies within the essence of Calvinism itself, which
explains why it almost or entirely crowded out the rudimentary
beginnings of Lutheranism and of the Anabaptist movement,
which were also present in those lands. This deeper reason lies
in the active character of Calvinism, in its power for forming
Churches, in its international contacts, and its conscious impulse
towards expansion, and, most of all, in its capacity to penetrate
the political and economic movements of Western nations with its
religious ideal, a capacity which Lutheranism lacked from the
very beginning . 308
Thus the social doctrines of Calvinism and its conception of
the Church also differed considerably from those of Lutheran-
ism. In course of time this difference became more and more
pronounced, with the result that at the present day Calvinism
feels itself to be the only Christian ecclesiastical body which is in
agreement with the modern democratic and capitalistic develop-
ment, and, moreover, the only one which is suited to it . 300 In
spite of the fact that originally it was very closely connected
with Lutheranism, Calvinism — while retaining its orthodoxy —
has gradually become the very opposite of Lutheranism, with
its State Church character, its institutionalism, and its conser-
vatism.
From the political and social point of view the significance of
Lutheranism for the modern history of civilization lies in its
connection with the reactionary parties; from the religious and
scientific standpoint its significance lies in the development of a
philosophical theology, which is blended with a religious mysti-
cism and “inward” spirituality, but which, from the ethical
point of view, is quite remote from the problems of modern
political and social life.
Calvinism, on the other hand (in more recent times under
the influence of Pietism and Methodism to which it is closely
akin), has, upon the whole, maintained its unphilosophical
theology, or at least after the disturbances of the Enlighten-
ment it rediscovered it. In its close connection with English and
American racial peculiarities and institutions, however, it has
merged with and to some extent produced that political and
social way of life which may be described as “Americanism”.
It is obvious that to-day this “Americanism” has an independent
existence, which is almost entirely divorced from a religioi^ basis
•°* See p. 879.
VOL. 11.
909 See p. 879.
1
578 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
of any kind . 810 Calvinism has, however, also had a reflex influence
upon the Continent of Europe. It has influenced Lutheranism
not only in the conception and constitution of the Church, in
the life of Christian social activity and fellowship initiated by
the Church, in Home Missions, in Pietism, but, as a universal
spiritual force, the type of humanity which it produces affects
the whole of European civilization ; for the most part, however,
this civilization is entirely unconscious of its original connection
with Calvinism. During this process of development, Calvinism
came into touch with the sects, which, as will become evident
later on, tended to approach Calvinism along their own line.
Together with the sects, and in co-operation with political and
social conditions, Calvinism has produced that particular type
of humanity which has just been described. This will become
fully evident when we have studied the question of the sect-
type within the sphere of Protestantism. Yet it is important to
call attention to this fact here, in order that we may take into
account that particular point in Calvinism at which, in its main
ideas, it came into closer or more permanent touch with the
sect-type than was the case with Luther (of course, I am alluding
only to his earlier period).
Calvinism has developed into a very widespread movement,
which has expanded far beyond its beginnings at Geneva. In
order to understand Calvinism, therefore, our primary task is to
distinguish the primitive Calvinism of Geneva from its later
forms of development. At the outset, however, we must ask the
following questions. To what extent are these later develop-
ments the logical outcome of primitive Calvinism? How far do
they transcend it? and what were the causes which led to this
development?
In such great questions, which are connected with the whole
history of civilization, from the very outset it is clear that develop-
ments of that kind were not influenced merely by the logical
dialectic and impelling energy of the religious idea, but also by
the particular historical situation at any given time. On the other
hand, Calvinism is such a magnificent austere intellectual system
that we arc bound to try to discover the inner intellectual connec-
tion which either persists through all these changes or is restored
by them . 811
810 On this point cf. Rauschenbusch: Christianity and the Social Crisis , New York, igo 8 .
Hundeshagen describes the astonishment of an American student who thought
that in Germany Christianity was a science, while in America it was a practical
matter. 811 See p. 879.
PROTESTANTISM
579
Primitive Calvinism
Thus our first task is to analyse the distinctive religious content
of primitive Calvinism, upon which was logically constructed
the edifice of its conception of the Church, its ethic, and its social
ideals. Only when that has been accomplished can we inquire
into the later development of Calvinism, and the changes which
have taken place in later Calvinism, in the political, economic,
social, and ecclesiastico-political sphere.
Primitive Calvinism is the daughter of Lutheranism. Originally
it had no other desire than to be purely Lutheran, both from the
theological and the religious point of view, part of a great united
Protestant body, able to absorb all fanatical movements into
its own life. In its second phase, under the influence of Bucer,
it assimilated the element of truth contained in the Anabaptist
movement, i.e. the practical social development of the con-
gregation, and in so doing it also came into contact with the
Reformation in Switzerland. Early Calvinism secured the
Lutheran doctrine of the sacraments against Zwingli by making
certain concessions, and yet it preserved their original meaning
intact. Finally, in union with the Upper Germans, it completed
the strict purification of public worship from all Catholic cere-
monies, at which point it came into agreement with Zwingli ; all
it aimed at, however, in this connection, was to carry out more
logically Luther’s principle of obedience to the Word of God.
While Calvin was insisting on the strictest purity and unity of
doctrine in Geneva itself, he still believed that by making certain
concessions on questions which were not vital to the main principle
he would be able to unite the various countries and Churches in
one great united Protestant body. It was only the resistance
of German Lutheranism, and the independence of Anglicanism,
which forced Calvinism to become an independent Protestant
Church . 312
Thus, the central element in Calvin’s theology and piety was
of Lutheran origin. Calvin always laid great stress upon his
agreement with Luther, and upon his personal relations with
him. He considered Luther the Reformer par excellence , but he
was not greatly attracted by Zwingli, and he treated him with
reserve. Calvin owed his conversion essentially to Lutheran
influences, and he also made use of Lutheran literature. So far
as the other influences in his life are concerned — the Humanistic
theology of the Reform, the Swiss purification of the Ghurch,
See p. 880.
580 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
and the ecclesiastical-social reform and union policy of Strass-
burg — he himself ascribed all that was really essential to Luther.
His Lutheranism was certainly of the Upper German, and
particularly of the Strassburg, kind, coloured by Bucer’s union
tendencies, the conditions in the city itself, the competition of the
Anabaptists, and the influence of the neighbouring inhabitants
of Zurich, but it was Lutheranism none the less.
The fundamental doctrines of Luther were therefore also
the fundamental doctrines of Galvin. Calvin held firmly the
Lutheran doctrines of justification and sanctification; indeed,
of all the Reformers, he actually expressed them in their purest
systematic form. Over against the absolute corruption caused by
sin and the helplessness of the natural man, he proclaims the
certainty of the forgiveness of sins and of the Divine Mercy freely
given by God in Christ, and the transformation of the soul into
joyful communion with God, with moral power and strength to
undertake active labour in the service of God. Further, just as
with Luther, this doctrine of justification and sanctification is
firmly embodied in the framework of the idea of the Church.
It is only completed through the agency of the Church as an
organ of salvation, endowed with the objective means of grace
in the Word and the sacraments; everywhere the Church only
produces subjective and personal religious life by means of the
Scriptures, and of the Christ revealed in Scriptures.
The main features of the Calvinistic religious system may then
be summed up as follows: a strict insistence upon the Church
as the organ which mediates salvation ; a very strong and definite
emphasis upon the sacraments as objective Divine means of grace;
the fact of the vital connection between Calvinism and the
Primitive Church (contrasted with the apostasy of the Papacy) ;
the logical establishment of the Church upon the Bible, as the
supernatural element which creates faith, and also proves its
supernatural origin by creating fellowship ; the catholicity of the
Church wherever the Word and the sacraments have been
preserved, even under the veil of error and false ceremonies; a
universal and uniform dominion of the truth of the Church within
the sphere which it can win and control ; the theocratic union of
Church and State, and the compulsory enforcement of the “pure
doctrine”, at least externally ; the closest union between Church
and State, while allowing each to retain its fundamentally distinct
character ; the acceptance of secular culture and the penetration
of the^system of “callings” belonging to the realm of Natural
Law, with the Christian spirit ; the identification of the Decalogue
PROTESTANTISM 581
with the Law of Nature and the approximation of positive law
to both ; and, last of all, its conception of the Church itself.
All these ideas Calvin adopted as finished products, and his
system was therefore free from the fluctuations amidst which
Luther first of all worked out these conceptions, and he shaped
them with the doctrinaire logic which is peculiar to men of a
second generation, due to their sense of possessing a secure
inheritance . 313
Distinctive Features of Primitive Calvinism
Thus all the distinctive features of Calvinism have only been
evolved out of the main stock of the ideal which it holds in
common with Lutheranism. That, however, does not imply
that these features are unimportant; on the contrary, they are
original, and of the highest significance. These peculiarly Calvin-
istic elements turned the religious thought of Protestantism into
a new channel, and it is not difficult to understand why this new
tendency was finally rejected by Lutheranism, whose outlook
was so entirely different. The essential differences lie within the
sphere of the Idea of God, of the fundamental, religious, and
ethical attitude which that involves, and finally in the sphere of
the peculiar conception of social duty which this implies.
(I) Doctrine of Predestination
The first distinctive feature of Calvinism, and the most im-
portant one, is the idea of predestination, the famous central
doctrine of Calvinism. It is the expression — gradually formulated
and finally strongly emphasized — of Calvin’s peculiar idea of
God. In this matter also Galvin is the disciple of Luther, and the
doctrine of predestination is primarily only the logical and
systematic emphasis upon the main aspect of Lutheran doctrine,
which is also a central point in Pauline doctrine, and which,
in his strict obedience to the Bible, he regarded as a directly
obligatory article of faith. It constitutes that particular element
in Lutheran doctrine by which the purity of the Reformed
Faith was protected against any admixture with the alloy of
human ideas and opinions. Faith is not a human faculty at all,
it is a perception given by God as an absolute miracle ; at the
same time the human element in the shape of all human “merit”
and all “natural” human activity is excluded, while the emphasis
on “grace” in a religion based on faith is fully preserved.
Thus, at first sight, Calvin’s doctrine of predestination ^seems
«*See p. 881.
»
582 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
to owe its significance only to the inferior acuteness of a disciple
who has systematized his master’s teaching and has thus mani-
fested the driving force of the motive behind the whole system.
But Calvin was more than a disciple or a mere imitator of Luther.
Behind his doctrine of predestination there lay also that idea
of God which was the peculiar element in his own personal piety.
In the idea of predestination Calvin is not merely trying to
discover and formulate the absolute miracle of salvation, its
supernatural character, and the fact that it is a pure gift of free
grace (its “givenness”) ; he is also trying to express the character
of God as absolute sovereign will.
Calvin’s idea of grace is that of pure unmerited grace, and is
not in any way concerned with any thought of justice which the
creature, in its misery, might desire to claim from the Lord of the
World. It is the Nature of God to give salvation to some without
any merit on their part, purely out of His own freewill and choice,
and to prepare destruction for others on account of their sinfulness.
No one has any right either to boast or to complain. Just as no
one can choose whether he will be a human being or an animal,
so no one has any right to claim to belong to the “elect” rather
than to the “damned”. God’s majestic sovereign will is the
supreme cause, the supreme standard. The reasons and norms
which do exist gain their significance only from God; there are
none which can be applied to Him, or to which He must bow.
In entire and arbitrary freedom He lays down the law for Him-
self; and this law is the law of His own glory which is served both
by the gratitude of the undeserved bliss of the elect and by the
misery of the merited despair of the damned. This means that
no longer, as in Lutheranism, is the idea of Love at the centre of
the conception of God, but the idea of Majesty, in which the
impartation and influence of the Love of God is only regarded as
a method of revealing the Majesty of God. According to this
conception God did not create the world out of a sense of need
for the responsive love of His creatures ; His world-plan has not
been disturbed by the freewill of the creature, and salvation
does not consist in the restoration of universal beatitude to all
creatures through the miracle of redemption. Rather it is the
inscrutable Will of God which is the basis of the world, and the
cause of its whole course. God ordained the sin of Adam, and
he makes use both of sinners and of those who are justified in
His world-economy ; the elect are a symbol of His mercy, which
bestows all that is good merely through the exercise of His Will,
and the damned serve as a symbol of His wrath against all that is
PROTESTANTISM
5B3
unhallowed and evil. To Calvin the chief point is not the self-
centred personal salvation of the creature, and the universality
of the Divine Will of Love, but it is the Glory of God, which is
equally exalted in the holy activity of the elect and in the futile
rage of the reprobate. In His Gospel God offers His grace to all,
but in the same Gospel He proclaims the duality of His counsel
of election and of reprobation, to which reason must submit
without making any attempts to harmonize these two aspects of
the truth.
Luther also had thus distinguished between the hidden and
the revealed God, but in the end Luther held to the revealed God
of the New Testament, and gave up speculation. Calvin retained
it, and in so doing he transformed the whole idea of God . 314
This new conception of God contains a wealth of implications.
From the outset it frees Calvinism from all the problems of the
Theodicy which weigh so heavily upon Lutheranism, and which,
while holding fast to the universality of the will of grace, lead
again and again to the problem of the righteousness of God,
and make salvation dependent upon the receptive will of the
creature. Within this conception there is room for different
purposes of God to exist alongside of each other; He reveals
Himself in the Gratia universalis , in all the gifts of reason, and in
the beauty of the world, in the elect and in the non-elect, and in
all these gifts He does not need to limit His purpose solely to
redemption; He reveals Himself in pains and penalties, which
are not merely means of education, purification, and expansion,
but which are decreed by His Sovereign Will in order to represent
His wrath, to steel the courage of His saints, and to prove the
nothingness of the material world ; He reveals Himself most
intimately, though not exclusively, in the bliss of those who are
justified, who may have unlimited confidence in God, who,
however, must also serve Him without reserve.
Although in his correspondence Calvin expounds with ardour
the ways of Divine Providence, this does not mean that he is
trying to “justify the ways of God to men” ; his aim is simply to
prove how God is guiding, testing, and saving the Church; to
heroism of this kind suffering, in itself, is no problem at all . 315
This idea of God is not drawn from the Old Testament, except,
perhaps, indirectly through Paul. It is the unique product of
Calvin’s own mind, to which, certainly, certain elements in the
thought of the Old Testament were congenial.
A further result of this conception of God is the practical and
814 See p. 883. 815 See p. 883.
584 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
ethical intention which it gives to the idea of justification ; for
justification does not mean a quietistic repose in thankful happi-
ness, but a method of activity and a spur to action. The Will,
with which the soul has to do, is active ; it is not simply the Mercy
which forgives sins. God creates, and grants in election, the
assurance of the forgiveness of sins, in order that the soul which
has been set free from guilt may serve Him as an instrument
of His Will. Through justification the elect are made members
of the Body of Christ, penetrated with the active spirit of Christ ;
they become Christ’s warriors and champions, subjects in His
Kingdom. The proof of justification does not consist in inwardness
and depth of feeling, but in energy and the logical result of action.
In Lutheranism the real proof and verification of justification is
that happiness which the world cannot give, which reaches its
highest point in close connection with the Christ who substantially
unites Himself in the Eucharist with the believer in the Unio mystica ,
in a mystical union with God.
In Calvinism, with its emphasis upon the transcendence of God,
such a proof could not be imagined ; union with God can only be
understood in the sense of surrender to the electing and renewing
will of God, and as an activity of the ever active (“ actuosen ”) God
in the believer, which indeed in the Eucharist results in an
actual union with the exalted Christ, but only in spirit, since
communion with Christ is not one of substance at all, but it
means being absorbed into the active and effectual spirit of
Christ. “ Finitum non est capax infinite is the principle of Calvinism,
and that gives both to the idea of justification and to that of faith
a different psychological meaning: instead of the characteristic
of happiness in the grace of God which forgives sins, we find the
certainty of belonging to the elect, and a spirit of active energy . 316
It is impossible to describe here in further detail the way in
which these views changed the whole colour of the body of
theology which Calvinism held in common with Lutheranism . 317
It is, however, significant that from this time forward the whole
body of doctrine, the “pure doctrine” itself, in spite of its ortho-
doxy, gained a quite different position in the whole intellectual
system. To the Lutheran, salvation and blessedness become
objective in the “pure doctrine” (which alone can produce these
effects), which is also the heart of the ecclesiastical institution,
816 This characteristic, above all, has been very well developed by Schnecken -
burger and continued by Max Weber: Archiv. XXI y pp. 21-25.
817 This has been done in a masterly way, although perhaps almost too com-
pletely, by Schneckenburger .
PROTESTANTISM
585
and the one objective element in Christianity. To the Calvinist,
in addition to the “pure doctrine”, there is the moral law, as
the expression of grace and discipline, as the expression of the
active Divine Will. To the Calvinist the creative centre of the
Church is the “pure doctrine 5 ’, combined with a Divinely revealed
discipline. In Calvin’s mind God cannot reveal Himself solely
in purity of doctrine; He must also manifest His active and
creative nature as an energy of will. Purity of doctrine, therefore,
is not, as in Lutheranism, the exclusive concern of the Church,
since, to the Lutheran, purity of doctrine guarantees purity of
faith, and with this all else comes naturally. The “pure doctrine”
is not an end in itself, but, just as faith is the presupposition of
right action, so also pure doctrine is only a presupposition and
a means to some further end. That means certainly that, as
well as the systematic statement of aim which characterises
Calvinism, there is also a theoretical development in doctrine
which extends beyond the requirements of Lutheranism; but
the doctrine which is developed, in spite of all its system and its
comprehensiveness, still remains a means to an end, the pre-
supposition of that which is really valuable — of Christian conduct.
This explains why Calvinism, with its severe logic and its accept-
ance of the culture of Western Europe, maintains a far higher
intellectual standard than Lutheranism, and yet lays far less
emphasis on doctrine and on system. To Calvin, God is irrational
in the sense that He is not to be measured by the standards of
human reason and logic. God, he teaches, gave us reason to
aid us in our work in the world, and for the glory of God. Thus
the keenest and the most cultivated intellect, and the clearest
formulation of doctrine, are only of use as tools for purposes which
are above the grasp of the intellect and as a preparation for
action . 318
Finally, we must note yet another ultimate effect of this idea
of God which has had a considerable influence upon practical
ethics: the altered conception of the Bible, the source of, and
the authority for, the “pure doctrine”. The sovereign Will of God
made known in election, and in the preparation of a community
of the elect, does not manifest itself merely in the spirit of love
and in the atoning sacrifice of the love of Christ, which, as the
very heart of the Bible, is seized and isolated by the faith which
experiences its power in such a way that the rest of the Bible
seems comparatively insignificant, or at least it merely serves the
purpose of pointing forward to Christ. Rather the revelation of
818 See p. 883.
586 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the sovereign predestination of God is, as a whole, a positive
revelation of will, a law of faith and of morals. Since the predomi-
nant idea in the Calvinistic conception of God is not love, but
majesty, holiness, sovereign power, and grace, so also the Bible is
regarded less as a means of attaining the assurance of the love
of God which forgives sins than a manifestation which should
create a community in which the glory of God will be realized,
which will also result in the overthrow of evil men and of repro-
bates. To Protestants of the second generation it seemed quite
natural to give the Bible an abstract independent position ; this
was a logical effect of Luther’s attitude to the Bible, in which it
constituted the final court of appeal. In Calvinism, therefore,
the Bible, regarded as that which had been founded by the anti-
rational positive Will of God, then became, further, a law,
whose aim and nature were of equal value in every part, in
which both the Old Testament and the New Testament bear the
common official character of revelation, and in which the only
distinction between them lies in the fact that certain Old Testa-
ment elements have been explicitly discarded by the New Testa-
ment. In Calvinism, therefore, the Old Testament attains a higher
and more independent position.
Since the Calvinistic Idea of God is in many ways similar to
the Idea ofjahweh whose Being is Will, the necessities of practical
life led to an increasing use of the Old Testament, as we shall see
directly. This development, however, meant that the Calvinistic
Theocracy became a Divine covenant with the Church upon the
basis of revelation, in which the State is to serve the Church after
the manner of the Kings of Israel, and in which public life is
controlled by the pastors after the manner of the Prophets. Thus
wc may sum up the Gospel of Calvin in the following terms : a
new Israel has been born, a new holy city has been founded,
established upon the Divine Law, which has been deepened by
the spirit of the New Testament, directed by the Will and the
Grace of God which deals out punishments and rewards, elected
to be the organ for the glorification of Christ, the God-man, in
whom the hidden electing will has become flesh, with power to
create the community of the Church.
Here, as at several other points, there emerges a certain resem-
blance to the Baptists, which will occupy our attention a good
deal from time to time. The Calvinistic doctrines of predestina-
tion and salvation are, of course, poles apart from the Baptist
doctrine of freedom, but the idea of the Bible which produces
the idea of predestination comes very near to the Baptist concep-
PROTESTANTISM
587
tion of the Bible. The Baptists held the same view of the Bible as
the moral law, and they also considered the constitution of the
Primitive Church to be the ideal Church constitution. The basis
of Calvin’s argument is certainly very different from that of the
Baptists. He does not share their desire to found a new and entirely
different religious community instead of the Church. His one
desire was to effect a radical reform of the Church in harmony
with the teaching of the Scriptures, and for this he found Scrip-
tural authority in a conception of God which was directed at the
same time towards the creation of a Church which is Scriptural,
pure, and holy. In so doing, however, he went beyond the idea
of the Church as the organ of salvation, based purely upon itself,
and came into contact with the leading ideas of the Baptist
movement. He came very near to their Scriptural purism. The
Lutherans were only interested in the Bible to the extent in which
it was concerned with the Church as the organ of grace, the
forgiveness of sins, and the work of Christ upon which all this is
based, and in this respect certainly they often used the Bible as
a law which regulates doctrine. Beyond that point, however,
they felt no need to make it into a law. Calvinism, however, did
feel this need. It extended the authority of the Bible over a
wider field, and in the process it transformed the whole concep-
tion of the Bible into an infallible authority for all the problems
and needs of the Church. Lutheranism controlled the doctrine
which it had evolved out of inward experience by the Bible;
Calvinism sought to renew the whole of Christianity, in doctrine
and the Church, in ethics and in dogma, solely through the Bible.
Its greater reforming radicalism was due to this fact, and to
the active character of its religion, which was based upon the
doctrine of election . 319
(II) Individualism
Thus as Calvinism has developed the Lutheran doctrine of
predestination, and of the idea of God, in a fresh light, the same
development also took place in its second distinctive character-
istic — that of religious individualism. Luther was always ultimately
concerned with the individual’s assurance of salvation, and his
happiness, flowing from the forgiveness of sins ; everything else,
however, is merely the overflow which radiates from union with
God, it is only a natural result, not an essential end.
Calvin’s view is different. He also emphasizes the need for
inwardness and the purely personal individual character of all
»• See p. 884.
588 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
piety. He also rejects a faith that is based merely on dogma and
authority, and discards all ideas of sacramentarian magic; he
also teaches that the new life must spring from faith. But since
to him the central point of religion is not the blessedness of the
creature, but the Glory of God, so also the glorification of God in
action is the real test of individual personal reality in religion.
In Calvin’s view the individual is not satisfied with mere repose
in his own happiness, or perhaps with giving himself to others
in loving personal service; further, he is not satisfied with an
attitude of mere passive endurance and toleration of the world
in which he lives, without entering fully into its life. He feels that,
on the contrary, the whole meaning of life consists precisely in
entering into these circumstances, and, while inwardly rising
above them, in shaping them into an expression of the Divine
Will. In conflict and in labour the individual takes up the task
of the sanctification of the world, always with the certainty,
however, that he will not lose himself in the life of the world ; for
indeed in everything the individual is only working out the
meaning of election, which indeed consists in being strengthened
to perform actions of this kind.
Within Lutheranism a position of this kind would be untenable,
for Lutheranism believes that it is possible to fall away from the
state of grace. This is the point at which there is the greatest
divergence of opinion between the two aspects of religious indi-
vidualism, which characterize the Protestant religion of faith
and sentiment. Lutheranism does not think out the doctrine of
predestination to its logical conclusion, i.e. the impossibility of
losing the state of grace. The reason for this lies in the fact that
from the very outset the one aim of Lutheranism is to secure the
monergism of grace in all that is good, while it teaches that evil
is due to the human will alone. Thus the supreme concern of the
Lutheran is the preservation of faith and of the state of grace, a
constantly renewed effort to maintain intact the purity and
stability of a faith which is independent of “works” or “merit”.
Hence all the emphasis is placed upon the cultivation of the emo-
tional life of the individual, on the maintenance of the sense of
an unmerited happiness, and the Christian ethic is regarded
merely as the preservation of the state of grace, which can be
lost either by falling into grave sin, or by relying upon one’s own
strength.
Calvinism, however, does not believe that the individual can
ever lose the state of grace, and therefore it has no trace of this
fear of losing grace. Hence it does not need to lower the tone of
PROTESTANTISM
589
the religious life to the level of self-preservation in the state of
grace, and it feels that a constant preoccupation with personal
moods and feelings is entirely unnecessary. The Calvinist knows
that his calling and election are sure, and that therefore he is
free to give all his attention to the effort to mould the world and
society according to the Will of God. He does not need to cling
to God lest he should lose Him ; on the contrary, he knows that
he himself is absolutely dependent upon God’s sustaining grace.
His duty, therefore, is not to preserve the “new creation” in its
intimacy with God, but to reveal it.
Thus from all sides the individualism of the “Reformed”*
Church was impelled towards activity ; the individual was drawn
irresistibly into a whole-hearted absorption in the tasks of service
to the world and to society, to a life of unceasing, penetrating,
and formative labour. This does not mean merely that Galvin-
istic individualism in its austerity and reserve is more firmly
established upon a basis of religious metaphysics ; still more im-
portant is the fact that it does not suffer from constant breakdowns
and reactions like those which characterize the Lutheran way
of life, and rivet the attention of Lutheranism again and again
simply to the fact of the forgiveness of sins. Calvinism organizes
the work of preservation logically and systematically, straight-
forwardly and with a clear aim in view. Above all, however,
this specifically Calvinistic individualism possesses this peculiar
characteristic that in its refusal to expand on the emotional side,
and in its habit of placing confidence in God in the foreground
and all human relations in the background, in going out of itself
it always directs its attention towards concrete aims and purposes.
Cfalvin’s correspondence reveals an amazing objectivity and
personal reserve, combined with an unceasing gathering together
of all for the purposes of the Christian community. As an “elect”
person the individual has no value of his own, but as an instru-
ment, to be used for the tasks of the Kingdom of God, his value is
immense.
This individualism differs not only from Catholic and Lutheran
individualism, but also from the optimistic, rationalistic indi-
vidualism of the Enlightenment. Founded upon a crushing sense
of sin, and a pessimistic condemnation of the world, without
colour or emotional satisfaction, it is an individualism based
upon the certainty of election, the sense of responsibility and of
the obligation to render personal service under the Lordship of
* The term * ‘Reformed* * is used throughout this book in the technical sense of
“Calvinistic. — Translator’s Note.
4
4
590 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Christ. It finds its expression in the thoughtful and self-conscious
type of Calvinistic piety, in the systematic spirit of self-control,
and in its independence of all that is “creaturely”. The value of
the individual depends wholly upon the merciful grace of election,
and it may give honour to none save God alone. This leads to
the result that against a background of the severest self-con-
demnation there stands out in clear relief in Calvinism the sense
of being a spiritual aristocracy ; this produces a detached and
aloof manner of handling all that is secular and creaturely, solely
with reference to their secular purposes, which extends into all
merely secular and natural personal relationships.
Calvin’s successors, however — both in the sphere of theology
and of practical pastoral work — were soon faced with this ques-
tion, which became more and more insistent as time went on:
How is it possible to be certain that one is of the number of the
elect? From the time of Beza the current reply was that the fact
of election was proved by good works, which are outward signs of
the inward state of grace. This idea, which was developed more
and more explicitly as time went on, drove the individual (who,
in Lutheranism could rely on the objective means of grace) to
the practice of self-examination and to systematic concentration
on his own independent achievement. This tended to make the
individual increasingly egocentric, and it also produced a strained
intensity in the pursuit Of the utmost possible perfection. Under
certain circumstances this spirit approaches legalism and per-
fectionism; ultimately, although the effect of election is most
strictly bound up with the Church, the Scriptures, and the Sacra-
ments, it makes the individual independent of the Church, and
assurance, like election, becomes entirely a matter for the indi-
vidual to ascertain. Without intending to do so, however, this
individualism had developed an individualistic independence of
the Church, which bore some resemblance to the individualism
of the sect-type. The severe self-control, based on the standard
of the Bible, which is characteristic of Calvinism, is also akin to
the sect-type, in spite of the fact that the whole idea is steeped
in the ideas of the Church and of grace ; this self-control is attained
again and again by ascribing all individual personality and its
achievements to the working out of predestination . 320
(Ill) The “Holy Community”
The third distinctive characteristic of Calvinism — the central
significance of the idea of a society, and the task of the restoration
880 See p. 884.
PROTESTANTISM
59i
of a holy community, of a Christocracy in which God is glorified
in all its activity, both sacred and secular — seems to be opposed
to this kind of individualism. This idea of a “holy community”,
however, has not been evolved out of the conception of the Church
and of grace, like the Lutheran ecclesiastical idea ; on the contrary,
it springs out of the same principle which appears to give inde-
pendence to the individual, namely, out of the ethical duty of the
preservation and making effective of election, and out of the
abstract exaltation of the Scriptures.
To Calvin the Church is not merely an organ of salvation
which provides the objective means of grace, from which every-
thing else should develop as a logical result, and from the stand-
point of which the ungodliness of the world must be supported in
patience and humility. The organ of salvation ought rather at the
same time to provide the means of sanctification; it ought to
prove itself effective in the Christianizing of the community, by
placing the whole range of life under the control of Christian
regulations and Christian purposes. At the same time it ought
to develop the necessary organs by means of which the com-
munity can be moulded by the Divine Spirit and the Divine Word,
in every aspect of life : in Church and State, in the family and in
society, in economic life, and in all personal relationships, both
public and private.
This theory represents the final development of ideas, which
Luther had suggested during the years of ferment and of local
reforms, but which he was obliged to drop for lack of real Christians
to carry them out. Calvin’s aim, however, was somewhat different
from that of Luther ; it was also more practicable. In this question
'Luther, with his emphasis upon freedom and personality, was
mainly concerned with the logical results of the principle of the
priesthood of all believers — i.e. with the autonomous adminis-
tration and self-government of the community ; the community
could, of course, at the same time evolve the means of self-control
and discipline, but all was to be done in complete freedom. But,
just because his main concern was the universal priesthood of
believers, he drew back from realizing his principle through the
revolutionary democratic movement, and contented himself
merely with ensuring the proclamation of pure doctrine by de-
pendence upon the territorial Princes. Calvin, however, was not
concerned with the priesthood of believers, but with making the
control and the purity of the Church effective . 821 He was so
82J Cf. Rieker , pp. 133 ff, (he is very good on this point) ; also Kostlin: Stud, und
Krit ., 1 868, p. 483.
59a THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
deeply convinced that this was necessary that he did not doubt
that, just as in the case of doctrine, the Scriptures would provide
him with the necessary support and counsel. Thus, in precisely
the same way that Luther deduced his doctrine from the Bible,
Calvin also evolved his theory of the constitution and Christian
organization of the Church from the Scriptures. In his view the
Holy Scriptures contained, in addition to the doctrines of justifica-
tion and predestination, the constitution of the Church in the
famous four orders: pastors, teachers or theoretical theologians,
deacons or those who relieved the wants of the poor, and the
board of discipline, which was to be composed of ministers, and
elected representatives of the local congregations or elders. The
fact that Calvin made the ethical interest of sanctification and the
exhortations of Scripture the starting-point for his theory instead
of the requirements of the priesthood of believers, secured his
religious system against all democratic and revolutionary excesses,
and against the perils of religious subjectivity. The participation
of the congregation which was possible within these limits, in
the choice of a pastor proposed to them by the ecclesiastical
collegium, in the choice of deacons, elders, and administrators of
discipline, made room within the ecclesiastical system itself for
those ideas of the universal priesthood, and of personal religion,
which could then be allowed to continue without harm, and with-
out any danger of being diverted into secular and democratic
channels. In Luther’s theory ethics and Church organization were
not based upon Scriptural doctrine, but everything was left to
free development; further, Luther could not admit that the
ethical end was more important than the happiness of justifica-
tion ; these two facts made it impossible for him to find a way out
of the difficulty along Calvin’s lines. Luther was obliged to give
up his idea of the Church which he had evolved solely from the
standpoint of the priesthood of all believers, and revert to the
objective institution of the ministry of the Word, which was merely
menaced, and not furthered, by handing over questions of
organization and discipline to the local congregations. Calvin,
however, saw no difficulty in this question at all. From his point
of view the task of the Church and the constitution of the Church
supplemented each other admirably, since the same Word which
bore witness to the faith as doctrine effected agreement to the
moral and constitutional ordinances, and thus from the outset
the universal priesthood was placed under effective control
without being abolished . 322
saa This j s told j n detail by Hundeshagen and Choisjy .
PROTESTANTISM
593
Calvinism and the Anabaptist Movement
At this point, however, the resemblance between Calvinism
and the sect-type becomes very evident. It is here no longer
merely an instinctive resemblance which occurs more or less
through the influence of the Bible, and which also appeared in
Luther’s suggestions for a congregational ideal comprising smaller
groups of earnest Christians. Rather there is here, through the
Strassburg Reformers and through Bucer, a special connection
with the Anabaptists. Since the Strassburg Reformers, by insti-
tuting the right of excommunication, and by undertaking the
supervision of morals, admitted that the Baptists possessed one
element of truth in which they were apparently justified, and as
they tried to take the wind out of the sails of the Baptists by
instituting an austere organization of the Church for the purpose
of sanctification, Calvin then convinced himself that these claims
were both Christian and Scriptural. In addition, they fitted in
quite well with his whole conception of the Christian Faith
and of predestination, which was directed entirely towards
activity . 323
Thus in Calvinism there appear a number of important
characteristics which are common both to the Calvinistic and to
the Baptist ideal of the Church as a society. Pre-eminent among
these characteristics are the right of excommunication, and the
conception of the Lord’s Supper as the fellowship of genuine and
believing Christians, from whom unbelievers are to be kept
separate. No one is admitted to Communion without being
subjected to a thorough process of strict examination and discip-
line. Thus the Lord’s Supper becomes more than the objective
assurance of salvation through the forgiveness of sins ; it becomes
also the occasion for the official inspection and purification of the
congregation. This latter element constitutes a complete departure
from the Lutheran point of view.
The celebration of the Communion becomes the central point
of the life of the congregation. The purity of the body of com-
municants remains a subject of the most earnest care, and leads
to scruples and fear of the Sacrament; in the end it often even
led to the formation of separatist movements. While Lutheranism
handed over to the secular authority the right of excommunica-
tion and the control of morals, the Calvinist community exercised
that authority itself, only at a later date restricting itself to spiritual
penalties alone.
3S8 See p. 885.
594 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
The Lutheran preparation for the Communion was personal
auricular confession and absolution ; the Communion itself was
the fulfilment of the blessedness of forgiveness with the Real
Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ, which can be enjoyed
in isolation apart from a general celebration in church. The
Calvinist preparation, on the contrary, took the form of searching
inquiry through pastoral visitation, and a careful purging of the
roll of communicants, and the Lord’s Supper was regarded as
having no meaning excepting as an act of the whole congregation.
The same thing applies to Baptism. It also is an act of the whole
congregation, and signifies the consecration of the child to the
Church ; in the Dutch and Rhenish churches full church-member-
ship was only permitted after the candidate had passed through
a thorough course of instruction as a catechumen. Baptism is
regarded as the recognition of the presumed state of election,
and is a sign of the candidate’s obligations towards the congrega-
tion, but it is not a vehicle of grace. Hence there arose, now and
again, misgivings about the rite of Baptism, and especially about
the baptismal formula, in so far as it attributes a Christian
character to the child instead of the mere obligation to become a
Christian. It is evident that this point of view of baptism is nearer
to the teaching of the Baptists than to that of Lutherans and
Catholics . 324
Again, in the process of sanctification, both of individuals and
of the Church as a whole, the Divine Law was regarded both as
a method of control and as the rule of life. In Lutheranism the
moral law of Scripture was regarded as having been instituted
solely in order to produce conviction of sin, to be applied to the
souls of those who are “justified” only in so far as the “old man”
has not yet been subdued, while the moral achievement itself
issues from faith alone, apart from the law; and the Decalogue,
interpreted in the spirit of Christ, is used only as a Christian
exhortation in popular religious instruction. In Calvinism, how-
ever, the Law was regarded rather as a positive Christian moral
law, as the standard of personal and congregational discipline, as
the rule of life required for that sanctification which flows from
the grace of election, and of its realization through the activity of
the Holy Ghost.
In Calvinism severe Scriptural legalism in morality prevailed,
just as in the Baptist community ; this legalism was expressed in
self-examination, in Church discipline, and in self-conquest for
the sake of sanctification. The Baptist idea of the content of the
See p. 886.
PROTESTANTISM
595
Law was, however, very different from that of Calvinism ; this
will soon become evident . 325
Combined with this legalism is the further idea of a continuous
progress in sanctification, which in genuine Calvinism, it is true,
does not lead to actual perfection, but to a comparative and partial
kind of perfection. The Lutheran idea of perfection meant no more
than the qualitative perfection of the “justified” ; it did not think
of sanctification as a gradual growth in actual holiness. The
Calvinistic idea was that of a relative “Perfectionism”, and only
among the Baptists do we find something similar; for this idea
has no connection with the Catholic doctrine of an intermittent
process of sanctification, which is continually being affected both
by mortal sin and by the sacramental inflow of grace. It is an
active ideal of holiness, resulting from the fundamental Calvinistic
idea of activity, and of the Scriptural doctrine of victory over sin,
which belongs inevitably to the ideal of the Holy Community . 826
Finally, however, the analogy is most complete in the Christ-
ology of Calvinism. It is true that it maintains the primitive
doctrine of the Two Natures, and the Pauline-Scholastic doctrine
of Substitution and Satisfaction, as strictly and firmly as the
Lutherans and the Catholics. But Calvinistic theology does not
believe that the primary significance of Christianity consists
simply in this : that in the Atoning Death of Christ the wrath of
God is extinguished, and the bliss of justification is secured, and
that this, believingly accepted, in itself actually constitutes the
whole status of the Christian, which, mediated solely through the
Word and the Church, will spontaneously create all the desired
spiritual results amid the continual resistance of the flesh and
of sin. In Calvinism, however, as among the Baptists, Christ is
rather the Lawgiver, the Example, and, above all, the Lord and
Head of the Church, which undertakes to follow Him, and which
through the Holy Spirit is drawn by Him into His dynamic
power. In Calvinistic theology, within the doctrine of the Two
Natures, a relative independence is assigned to the Human Christ,
through which He gains salvation through obedience. Since,
then, the power of this work of Christ is imparted to believers in
Christ by the Holy Spirit, Christ is thus an Example of unfailing
325 See p. 886.
328 On this progress in sanctification and relative Perfectionism, see Schnecken -
burger , 7 , 45, 78 ff., and 166 ff. It is the preparatory stage for Methodism, as
Schneckenburger likes to point out ; see also Heppe: Geschichte des Pietismus und der
Mystik in der reformierten Kir che f 1879, pp, 49, 126, 419, who shows the transition to
Puritanism and Pietism. Wemle: Der Christ und die Siinde bei Paulus is also useful ;
this book deals with the Scriptural basis of Perfectionism.
596 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
faithfulness and holiness, the Law-giver of the Christian rule of
sanctification, the guarantee before God for those who follow Him,
and who receive into their souls the activity of His Will. Whereas
from the Lutheran point of view, through the union of the Divine
and Human Natures in Christ in the Word and the Sacrament,
He is the visible embodiment of the forgiveness of sins, and along
with forgiveness He gives Himself and all His benefits to faith,
from the Calvinistic point of view Christ is the Lord and Head
of the Church, who has bound Himself to her through His Act
of Redemption, and He Himself is incomplete until the Church
is perfected in holiness, in a bliss which will be consummated in
the life beyond the grave.
From the Lutheran standpoint the Unio Mystica with Christ is
a substantial indwelling, with a fullness of blessing which con-
stitutes the happiness of faith ; from the Calvinistic point of view
it is the relation of the members to the Head, who rules and
instructs them, and brings them to fruition through the gradual
sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit which awakens faith.
Thus, both in the formulation of the doctrine of the Two
Natures and in that of the Atonement, the Calvinistic point of
view reveals an extensive approximation to the Baptist idea of
Christ as Lawgiver, Example, and Head of the Church, who
will only attain His maturity in the future Kingdom of God.
There is, of course, no trace of the Baptist tendency to reject
the doctrine of the Atonement, but, all the same, the Atonement
is regarded more as a means of creating the Church than as
the decisive act (complete within itself) which turns away
the Divine Wrath and fills the ecclesiastical treasury with
Grace . 327
Only when this doctrinal standpoint had been attained did it
become possible for the Christian Church to accept the Calvinistic
idea of a Covenant. The Church is based upon a Covenant between
God in Christ and the body of believers, in which God undertakes
to fulfil His Promise of Grace and the Church undertakes to yield
obedience to Him. This idea is thoroughly non-Lutheran, and
bears a close resemblance to the separatist ideas which led
earnest Christians of a certain narrow type to form sectarian
groups of their own. Thus in each parish there was actually a
double roll of Church membership ; on the one side there were
the true, genuine, faithful, and active Christians, and on the other
those who were merely nominal and worldly. Thus the effect of
Calvinism was the separation of the pure body of communicants
887 See p. 886.
PROTESTANTISM
597
from the impure ; in fact it produced the distinction between an
open and a closed community, which reminds us of the separation
between the world and the “saints” set up by the sect. The true
covenant-members are distinguished from the Church which
includes the reprobate . 828
This line of development shows that instinctively Calvinism
has logically developed the ideas implicit in the Anabaptist ideal
of a holy community, which it accepts and acknowledges as
Scriptural, and in so doing it has developed the analogies with
this ideal in various directions. These analogies, however, were
strictly limited by the ecclesiastical spirit of a Christian national
and State Church, which admits the necessity for various stages
of human experience, and by the idea of pure grace which excludes
every kind of human initiative.
First of all, the Christian moral law and the holiness of the
Church are conceived in such a way that precisely those demands
of the Baptists which were most striking to the outside observer —
abstention from official position, from positions of authority,
from law, oath, war, and also their communism — were unhesitat-
ingly rejected, and it was asserted that within the sphere of
relative Natural Law which is adapted to fallen humanity, from
the Christian point of view, all these things are permitted and
commanded. Although, under the influence of Pietism, the later
Calvinism now and again had misgivings even about these very
questions, yet Calvin himself, and the whole of orthodox Calvinism,
joyfully accepted the world, and placed these very things at the
disposal of the “holy community”. If, then, we attempt to draw
comparisons between Calvinism and the sect-type at all, the
resemblances will be found to be more in the direction of the
aggressive reforming sects, with their “Holy Wars”, than in that
of the sects which practise non-resistance and endure persecution.
In reality, however, to a far greater extent, the underlying current
of thought in Calvinism was influenced by the general stream of
ecclesiastical thought; we shall see later on how this ecclesiastical
outlook was balanced by the demand for a specifically Christian
holiness.
Secondly, the whole legal spirit, the appeal to personal resolu-
tion, the thought of Christ as the great Exemplar, and of the Law
of Christ, the idea of a Covenant and of a fellowship of believers
in Christ, is not conceived indeterminately as subordination,
confession of faith, and personal fellowship as in the Anabaptist
movement, which always fought hard against the doctrine of
»« See p. 886.
598 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Predestination, but as the effect of election produced by God
through the Spirit.
The impression that Calvinism fosters an atomistic individual-
ism, in which the community merely consists of the sum of the
individuals composing it, is only a superficial idea, which fastens on
the external process through which this society is built up. In
reality it is truer to say that all proceeds from the effectual grace
of election, and that all the rest — Unio cum Christo , the Covenant
of the Church with God, the deliberate emphasis on good works,
the law, and fidelity to law, self-examination and ethical improve-
ment — is effected by Christ, the God-Man who by means of
His Divine Nature effects all this through His human Nature
and the Holy Spirit. Obedience and the imitation of Christ, the
covenant relationship and Christocracy — in reality, all that means
insitio in Corpus Christi : this activity has only been awakened by
the fact of election. Nothing is left to individual initiative save the
recognition that these achievements are signs and tokens of
the presence of the Spirit ; human initiative itself, however, is the
work of the Spirit, and the very fact of its presence shows
that it is due to the operation of Christ . 329 Under these circum-
stances, even the separation between the children of this world
and the saints is conceived differently from the idea of the Ana-
baptists. Since in dealing with one’s fellow-men, at least, it is
impossible to distinguish outwardly the elect from the reprobate,
everyone is to be considered and exhorted as belonging to the
elect, while on the other hand the reprobates, at least outwardly,
are to be disciplined by the Church, to prevent them from becoming
a stumbling-block, and in order that, outwardly at least, they
may give glory to God. Both groups are to be included in an
ecclesiastical civil commonwealth, and are to be kept in the fear
of God by the State and by the Church. The Final Judgment
alone will effect the separation between them. In the visible
Church men are not to make any difference between the invisible
community of the elect, which it contains, and the reprobate.
Therefore, until Calvinism came under the influence of Pietism,
it did not attempt to separate the wheat from the tares . 330
Above all, however, Calvinism differed fundamentally from
the Anabaptist movement in its ideal of the Law of Christ, which
— so far as its content is concerned — governs the holy community.
822 On this point see especially Schneckenburger in the chapter on the Unio
mystica , /, 2 ig. Since the Church, the Word, and the means of grace belong
to the methods of working out predestination, along this line also the ecclesi-
astical idea itself is included. 880 See p. 887.
PROTESTANTISM
599
In this matter, as we have seen already, not only did Calvinism
not shrink from taking part in the institutions of relative Natural
Law belonging to fallen human nature, but it felt no need at all to
adjust its ethical ideal to the law of Christ in the New Testament,
or the Sermon on the Mount. At this point Calvin diverged from
the sect-ideal far more widely than Luther, in the sense of a prac-
tical understanding of life. While, on the one hand, Calvin went
farther than Luther by adopting and establishing the ideal of
the Holy Community, and the disciplinary organizations which
maintain it, on the other hand, at the very point where Luther
followed the sect-ideal by his recognition of the ethic of the
Sermon on the Mount as the really inward and personal ethic
of Christianity, Calvin felt no sympathy for it at all, nor had he
any sense of its connection with the rest of the Bible. Since in
Calvin’s conception of God the idea of free omnipotence and
sovereign glory transcended the idea of love, so also, from the
outset, in his conception of the Christian moral law, the thought
of the glory of God outweighed the thought of the claims of a
brotherly love which would overcome all conflict and all law
through communion with God. In contrast with Lutheranism
nothing stands out so characteristically in Calvin’s ethic as the
absence of any sense of the need to justify and balance the radical
ethic of love of the Sermon on the Mount over against the claims
of the social ethic of the practical life of politics and of Society.
Throughout Calvin’s correspondence, in which he gives his
judgment on a countless number of ethical cases, there is not
even a suspicion of that individualistic morality with its hostility
t0 9 the world, and its opposition to an official morality which it
is forced to accept. Wholly instinctively, and with piercing insight,
Calvin singles out of the Christian morality of love the religious
element of activity for the glory of God, and of sanctification for
God and for His Purpose, which has always distinguished Calvin-
ism from any mere sentimentality and humanitarianism. Without
hesitation he regards everything as commanded and permitted
which can serve the glory of God — and by that he means that the
Church is to be set up, maintained, and kept pure as a community
of saints closely connected with the State and with Society. When
it is claimed that the Christian ought to renounce authority and
law, wealth and possessions, rewards and worldly honours, Calvin
takes care to explain that this renunciation only applies within
certain limits — that is, that a renunciation of this kind must be
solely designed to serve the spirit of holiness and brotherly love,
but that it must not be permitted in any way to endanger the
N
600 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
glory of God Himself. Where this is concerned, all those methods
are not merely permitted, they are commanded ; of course it is
understood that they are to be exercised within the limits of
sincerity, personal gentleness, and disinterested enthusiasm for the
cause, without any hatred or injury to individuals. Without further
argument he interprets the Sermon on the Mount in this sense ;
above all he bases his argument repeatedly upon the Old Testa-
ment (which cannot fail to harmonize with the Sermon on the
Mount, since the Bible is a unity), upon the reforms and the
policy of the kings who “feared the Lord”, on the Decalogue,
on the later ethic of Judaism, on David and the Psalms.
The result of all that is undertaken must always be committed
into God’s keeping, but the believer is entitled to use every
legitimate method, and he may connect it directly with the re-
ligious end in view, without appealing to the support of an alien
official morality. This idea of an official morality has only been
retained in so far as Galvin gives a prominent place to all those
who, by virtue of their calling and their official position, are
called to use law and authority, to an active participation in
political and military affairs. In such cases, however, a direct
religious value is assigned to their activity, without any sense of
conflict, or need for the reconciliation of opposing ideas. Calvin
himself writes and acts like a most practised and accomplished
politician, and like a military strategist who has weighed all the
risks. In all this, certainly, all that is left to the masses is obedience
to their leaders, without any scruples about their Christian right
to use force and violence for the glory of God.
Further, Calvin was not opposed to private property nor Jo
the endeavour to acquire wealth, provided that all is done honestly,
moderately, and united with a generous charitable activity. It
all serves the good of the community (of the Church), of the State,
and thus the glory of God ; it is only a question of defining its
limits ; in itself it is no problem at all. Only upon this assumption
can we understand Calvin’s strong attraction to the Old Testa-
ment. Only when the New Testament ethic is thus fused with
that of the Old Testament, as Calvin has done, only when the
Love of God is conceived as the Will which elects certain souls,
and when love to God is regarded essentially as the sanctification
of the life of the individual and of Society for the sake of God,
does such an interpretation of the New Testament become possible.
Calvin adopted this position entirely instinctively. He had no
quarrel with the Lutheran ethic; he was simply acting on his
conviction that such a position was only the logical result of
/
PROTESTANTISM
601
his genuine Reformation exaltation of the Bible, in the belief
that an ethic of this kind also harmonized with the genuine
Reformation predestinarian conception of God. As in increasing
measure Luther had already appealed to the Old Testament in
order to justify his intramundane ethic of vocation (“the calling”),
so Galvin also adopted this position. Here also he believed that
he was only developing common principles of the Reformation
more strictly and practically. We must remember, too, that Calvin
had never passed through the school of monasticism.
Thus he found it possible to make an ethic of sanctification the
underlying basis of Church discipline and of the development of
the State, which in its severity might be compared with that of
the Baptists, without making the radical ethic of love of the
Sermon on the Mount into a universal law, since this would be
impossible for Society as a whole. This is the actual source of the
alleged “Old Testament” character of Calvinism. It is the same
instinct which, at an earlier historical stage, had impelled the
type of the aggressive reforming sect towards the Old Testament,
its “holy wars” and its covenants. This phenomenon is not a
revival of Jewish legalism, but of the Old Testament concern
with the practical life of the nation. Nor has this ideal of the holy
community anything to do with reactions towards Catholicism.
It is the sect-ideal, united, however, with the idea of the Church
as an institution, brought within the bounds of practical possi-
bility by an extensive application of Old Testament principles; in
all other respects it is a most active and vital form of Protestantism.
Compared with Luther’s teaching about the duty of love and
gatience and the endurance of suffering, it is certainly a more
practical and opportunist point of view. But since everywhere its
aim is simply to work for the glory of God and of the Church,
with an entire renunciation of all self-interest, it is not a deprecia-
tion of Christian morality to the average level ; rather it is an
emphasis upon that other element in the Christian ethic which
is bound up with it, of that fearless heroism which will dare and
achieve anything for the glory of God . 331
Again, if men hold the view that the glory of God is furthered
by the institution of a holy community, and not merely by the
preservation of personal religion, then this superior heroism will
no longer be merely passive but active and organizing, and it
must seize the means that it needs in order to achieve its purpose.
This, however, is precisely the nature of the Calvinistic ethic,
which, while it has exercised the severest self-repression, has
831 See p. 887.
602 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
indeed achieved great things, even when it made use of secular
institutions for the Kingdom of God. In Calvin’s view the glory
of God is not advanced by the repeated surrender of the sinner
to the forgiving love of God, but in the evolution of the holy
community, by means of self-surrender to God and to His
commands . 332
It is thus quite easy to understand the emphasis which Calvin-
ism lays on fellowship, in the inclusive sense of a State Church
association for Christian sanctification, in accordance with the
example, law, and lordship of Christ. This is an interesting pheno-
menon, taken in conjunction with its peculiarly accentuated
stress on independence and individualism.
The sectarian ideals which had been absorbed from the New
Testament and from the Anabaptist criticism of the Reforma-
tion were thus fused with the idea of the Church as an organ of
grace, and merged in the idea of predestination, which by its
active character intensified the sectarian ideal, and yet kept the
balance by its emphasis on the ideal of the Church. This fact,
however, explains why, throughout Calvinism, we see a twofold
tendency, which aims at the active formation of a society, and
also at personal achievement, combined with a methodical,
rational method and a completeness of action, all of which are
directed towards the goal of the happiness of the future life. This
leads Calvinism everywhere to an organized and aggressive effort
to form associations, to a systematic endeavour to mould the life
of Society as a whole, to a kind of “Christian Socialism”. This
“Christian Socialism” certainly is not primarily concerned (like
its modern counterpart) with the material, economic preliminary
conditions of higher intellectual culture, neither has it, of course,
anything at all to do with the modern class problems which have
been created by Capitalism and Industrialism ; but it lays down
the principle that the Church ought to be interested in all sides
of life, and it neither isolates the religious element over against
the other elements, like Lutheranism, nor does it permit this
sense of collective responsibility to express itself merely in par-
ticular institutions and occasional intervention in affairs, as in
Catholicism . 333
The Ethic of Calvinism
This brings us to the fourth point : the peculiar ethic of Calvin-
ism. At first Calvin simply continued Luther’s point of view — that
is, he evolved ethical principles from the spirit of faith ; the only
888 See p. 887. 888 See p. 890.
PROTESTANTISM
603
difference he made was that he applied this principle more
systematically and more clearly. In so doing, however, the whole
idea of ethics was altered ; instead of being merely the result of
justification by faith it became the end. This transformation,
of course, was one which could take place very easily on the
assumption of the doctrine of predestination, without any reaction
in the direction of a system of “good works” and merit. Further,
the standard of Christian ethical behaviour has become more
definite in outline, for from the very outset the Holy Spirit provides
a clear and definite standard in the moral law of Scripture : the
Decalogue, interpreted in the sense of the whole range of Scrip-
tural ideas, and identified with the natural moral law. At this
point, indeed, Lutheranism also had not been able to limit its
ethical theory to one of obedience to spontaneous impulse in
behaviour; it did admit that the Decalogue was the expression
of the Divine Will with regard to moral impulse. Calvinism also
adopted all the following ideas from Lutheranism: Luther’s
theory of the Decalogue, of the two Tables of the Law, of the
identity between the Divine and Natural Law, and the Christian
interpretation of the Decalogue as a law of spirit and of freedom,
which depends upon the power of the Holy Spirit in order to
realize it in life. Calvin, however, gave the Decalogue a firmer
position in the system, since to him the usus legis was not a problem
bristling with difficulties, but a coherent fundamental theory.
Why should the Holy Spirit dispense with that clarity in ethics
which He reveals in doctrine? The Bible itself lays stress on
ethics as well as on doctrine. In the mind of Calvin this does not
signify a reaction towards heteronomy or legalism, since in this
law it is only the content of faith in its ethical aspect which is
manifested, and since the value of the moral achievement does
not consist in particular actions, but in the spirit generated by
faith in the whole personality, in the total change of heart effected
by conversion . 334 By means of the Decalogue the Holy Spirit
solely enlightens the elect about those regulating principles of
action which lead to the realization of the Kingdom of Christ,
which cannot be left to the mercy of mere instinctive, unen-
lightened natural feeling. In this respect also Calvin is only the
systematic thinker and practical organizer ; at this point, however,
he leaves the idealistic freedom of Luther behind and moves
towards the average constraint of the human sense of the need for
authority.
334 Cf. Lobstein , pp. 58-60 \ the Decalogue as little heteronomous as the natural
moral law, both means of the moralizing and Christianizing of Society.
604 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
The following features also are peculiar to the Calvinistic ethic :
the doctrine of final perseverance, or the impossibility of losing
the state of grace, which creates a uniform permanent state of
moral achievement and assurance, in place of the Lutheran idea
of the possibility of falling away from grace and the renewal of
justification ; then there is the doctrine of a progressive sanctifica-
tion, which teaches that the germ of the grace of election becomes
increasingly conscious, and that it develops more and more into
a mature Christian experience; this is an absolute contrast to
the Lutheran suspicion of the whole idea of progress, and to its
connection with preparation for Heaven. It is these distinctive
features in the thought of Calvinism which have produced those
systematic, rational, inclusive, and progressive elements which
characterize its personal and its social ethic, creating an ethical
ideal which is not merely an ideal for the achievement of indi-
vidual Christian character, but one which covers the whole
life of the world with an all-embracing religious purpose. The
natural result of all this is seen in the more closely knit, com-
prehensive, and penetrating energy of the Calvinistic social
doctrines. By treating moral progress and achievement as
practical proofs of the state of grace the Calvinist ethic was
extraordinarily intensified and also externalized, yet at the same
time it also became more accessible to the average attainment
of mankind . 335
Yet all these peculiar aspects of the Calvinist ethic, with their
influence on character, in spite of their effectiveness, were still
rather external. Far more important is their unique content:
the ascetic outlook which was produced by the direction of purpose
towards the future life, and by the austere separation between
God and the creature; this asceticism also included the most
positive kind of work within this world itself. This is one of the
most creative elements of the Calvinistic ethic, since it has deter-
mined the whole way of life which is peculiar to the nations who
have been bred in the atmosphere of Calvinism . 836 As has been
already shown, in itself asceticism only becomes connected with
Christianity through the pessimistic doctrine of Original Sin,
which depreciates the value of the life of the world in comparison
with the world of redemption and of salvation, and which at the
835 Cf. Lobstein , pp. 75-78 : no conversion conflict as in Lutheranism, but
development within and through the community for the community. Other-
wise, see above, all Schneckenburger , whose analysis of this ethic is particularly
masterly, whereas the dogmatic analysis tends to modernize too much.
838 See p. 890.
PROTESTANTISM
605
same time desires to control the life of the flesh and of the senses
by means of a rational system of discipline. The Gospel outlook
transcended the things of time and sense, and expected the coming
of the Kingdom of God upon earth ; it did not renounce the world,
nor did it develop a systematic discipline of the life of the senses.
Asceticism only found its way into Christianity when the idea
arose that the world was permanently lost and steeped in Original
Sin, and when the Kingdom of God came to be viewed as some-
thing belonging to the future life.
From the very beginning asceticism had a dual significance:
on the one hand it was a metaphysical condemnation of the world,
and on the other it was a rational discipline of the senses. It was
possible for both these elements to unite ; it was also possible for
them to exist separately. It was quite possible for ascetic world-
denial to develop into Antinomianism, and ascetic discipline was
quite capable of developing into a severe austere eudaemonistic
legalism, with its eye fixed on future rewards. Both kinds of
asceticism were practised within Catholicism. Catholicism, above
all, felt the difficulty of making room for ascetic morality along-
side of the unavoidable necessities of life in the world. It found
the solution of the problem in its dualistic theory of morality,
and in the full meaning of the word it placed asceticism alongside
of and above the life of the world, which only recognizes ascetic
obligations now and again, and within practicable limits. Catholic
asceticism was, and still is, a form of life which existed alongside
of and above the average conditions of life in the world, cultivated
particularly in monasteries and confraternities and among the
clergy.
Protestantism, however, discarded that dualism, and laid upon
all alike the duty of permeating the life of the world with the
spirit of world-renunciation and victory over the world. Its ideal
was one of spiritual detachment from the things of this world,
combined with victory over the world, while remaining within it.
Thus it intensified the moral demand by making it apply to all
alike, and it intensified the pessimistic doctrine of Original Sin in
its desire to make the idea of conversion and of redemption
dominant over the whole of existence. Thus to a certain extent
Protestantism maintained asceticism, but only in the form of
an asceticism within the life of the world. Within this sphere
of general agreement, however, Lutheranism and Calvinism
developed along very different lines. They divided between them
the two fundamentally different aspects of asceticism which have
already been mentioned : the spirit of metaphysical depreciation
606 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
of this sinful world, and the systematic discipline of the senses.
Lutheranism depreciated this world, mourning over it as a “vale
of tears”, but so far as everything else was concerned the Lutheran,
happy in the assurance of justification, and nourished by the
Presence of Christ in the sacraments, let things remain as they
were, quite happy and confident, accepting the world as he found
it, exhibiting Christian love in faithfulness to the duties of his
calling, leaving results to God, and incidentally thankfully
rejoicing in the Divine glory of creation which breaks through the
shadows cast by this sinful world. In this attitude there are traces
of the mystical Neo-Platonic depreciation of the senses and of the
finite, which had already played a prominent part in Catholicism,
and incidentally there appeared also, in connection with the
freedom of the Spirit from the world — in sharp contrast with the
legalism of the “Reformed” churches— the antinomian result.
Here also Lutheranism, which is happy in the midst of wretched-
ness, is entirely illogical ; it takes impressions just as they come,
both the misery and vexation of the world, and also thankful
enjoyment of the gifts of God ; neither the one nor the other really
matter, since through justification by faith the world has been
overcome.
The Calvinist’s attitude towards the world is quite different.
He finds it impossible to deny the world in theory and enjoy it in
practice. This lack of system is contrary to his reflective and
logical mind. He cannot leave the world alone in all its horror
and comfort himself with the thought of a “finished salvation”.
That kind of Quietism is totally opposed to his impulse towards
activity, and the idea of a “finished salvation” is opposed to his
orientation towards the aim of a salvation which is yet to be
attained. With his deep sense of the gulf which separates the
omnipotence of God from the nothingness of the creature any
attempt to find satisfaction in creatures, even of a passing kind,
would mean a deification of the creature. The creature in itself
is only a means; it is never a Divinely complete end in itself.
Moreover, to the Calvinist the sinful creaturely world is an
abomination which he must oppose with all his might, and which
he feels he must overcome. Thus he knows he must go to work
thoughtfully, systematically, and progressively to overcome the
tendency to deify the creature, and all the sin which clings to the
senses and to self-love. In view, however, of his Protestant estimate
of the secular life, and of his ideal of a Holy Community summed
up in the form of a State Church, he can only overcome the world
by at the same time recognizing the value of its life.
PROTESTANTISM 607
Calvinism, therefore, creates an intramundane asceticism
which logically and comprehensively recognizes all secular means,
but which reduces them to means only, without any value in
themselves, in order that by the use of all the means available
the Holy Community may be created. The method by which
all that is secular is reduced to the level of a mere means is a
rigorous discipline of the instinctive life, a destruction of all
merely instinctive feeling, and the limitation of the sense-life to
that which is necessary and useful, the practice of self-discipline
and self-control in order to lead a holy life in obedience to the
Law of God.
These are the ideas which lie behind that combination of
practical sense and cool utilitarianism with an other-worldly aim,
of systematic conscious effort united with an utter absence of
interest in the results of effort, which is a distinctive character-
istic of Calvinism, and in which all the qualities which have
already been described are merged.
This peculiar combination of ideas produces a keen interest in
politics, but not for the sake of the State ; it produces active indus-
try within the economic sphere, but not for the sake of wealth ; it
produces an eager social organization, but its aim is not material
happiness; it produces unceasing labour, ever disciplining the
senses, but none of this effort is for the sake of the object of all
this industry. The one main controlling idea and purpose of this
ethic is to glorify God, to produce the Holy Community, to
attain that salvation which in election is held up as the aim;
to this one idea all the other formal peculiarities of Calvinism are
subordinate.
Only when we see Calvinism from this angle can we grasp the
full significance of Calvinistic legalism, and its resemblance to
Catholic disciplinary asceticism which has often been remarked,
even to the point of a righteousness consisting in “works” and
the desire for reward. In pure Calvinism, however, all these
weaknesses are obviated by the ideas of grace and predestination,
which, on the other hand, fostered this tendency to legalism by
its teaching about good works as the signs of election.
It is well known that Calvin’s judgment in these questions was
comparatively free from prejudice), and that he knew how to
appraise the values of civilization in the Gratia universalis , which
also lays hold on the reprobate making them capable of higher
achievements, and thus also revealing the beauty of the world.
This Gratia universalis , however, which softens the ascetic tendency,
is still only a foreign body in the system, introduced under the
6o8 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
pressure of practical life and under the influence of ancient
classical culture. When the problem is viewed in the light of
Christianity — and that is the decisive point — there Calvin also
ceased to assign any positive value to creaturely achievement
and earthly glory; all are regarded simply as a means for
establishing the dominion of Christ. The Gratia universalis , regarded
in the light of a civilization which is not controlled by the
dominion of Christ, is valid only for the reprobate and the
unconverted. The elect and the converted, on the contrary, use
their possessions solely for the purposes of religion. Calvin permits
joy, it is true, but only in a very restricted way, as a necessary
and useful relaxation . 337
Moreover, as will easily be understood, later Calvinism intensi-
fied and systematized Calvin’s rigorism to a pitch of Puritanical
legalism and purely utilitarian restraint, which stands out in
sharp contrast from Lutheranism, which in this respect is most
illogical. It would be wrong to try to find in this development a
trace of the influence, whether past or present, of Catholicism,
which, indeed, scarcely bears any trace at all of this kind of
asceticism within the ordinary life of the world. It is the very
essence of the genuine Calvinistic spirit, and it has bred that sober,
utilitarian, energetic, and methodical purposive humanism which
labours on earth for a heavenly reward, which in its secular form
is only too well known to us to-day. Calvin’s own attitude, and
the spiritual counsel he gives in his letters, provide the most
magnificent example of an ascetic and utilitarian ethic of this
kind. In his case, however, this way of life was still penetrated by
a genuine religious dignity and majesty, with a sense of responsi-
bility and of a wide range of thought, with the consciousness of
the greatness of the ultimate End. Thus his ethical system and his
methodical habit of mind never became petty ; on the contrary, it
was characterized by the highest sense of duty towards an objective
task in life, which does not consider the feelings and inclina-
tions of the individual, but which concentrates entirely upon
work for God. In the greatness of genuine Calvinism there is
always an undertone of this kind. But in periods of peace and
relaxation, under the influence of the human tendency to sink
to the average level, and in connection with the bourgeois life of
business, this spirit becomes rather self-righteous and Pharisaical,
very full of the consciousness of belonging to the number of the
elect and expecting the heavenly reward. These sentiments found
apparent support in the Old Testament, and, not without reason,
187 See p. 892.
PROTESTANTISM
609
the Puritans have been often regarded as Jewish Christians. While
the passivity and happy surrender of Lutheranism, combined
with its emotional warmth and naivete, with its tendency to
give rein to natural impulses, has left its mark, in the form both
of a dependent spirit and of geniality, upon large sections of
German civilization right down to the present day, the school
of Calvin, on the other hand, has bred in the Calvinistic nations
a habit of personal reserve, positive restraint, aggressive initiative,
and a reasoned logic of the aim of action . 338
Since, however the sphere of one’s calling provided both scope
and a method of discipline for this intramundane asceticism,
the idea of the “calling” itself here gained a new and specially
emphasized significance, which distinguished it not only from the
Catholic, but also from the Lutheran conception. This concep-
tion provides the transition to modern vocational humanism.
The Early Church, in its defensive attitude towards the world,
tolerated the natural organization of labour and the various
degrees of Society, regarding them as matters of indifference so
far as the question of salvation was concerned ; it had only excluded
certain callings from those in which Christians might take part,
on account of their incompatibility with the Christian Faith . 339
The mediaeval period brought the natural lower grade of secular
work and the natural social organization into an inner connection
with the spiritual sphere of the Church, but it still regarded it all
as a providential classification on the basis of Natural Law, upon
which real religious achievements still had to be built up, but
which was not binding for the heroes of the religious life, the
vicarious representatives and authors of the essential Christian
spirit . 340 At this point it was Protestantism alone which drew
Nature and Grace together, since in its view the redeeming Will
of Grace both gave each man his secular task in the World
and made it the normal sphere, necessary for everyone, for the
exercise of the spirit inspired by Divine Grace.
From the economic and social point of view the consequences
of this conception of the “calling” were extraordinary. It raised
the ordinary work of one’s profession (within one’s vocation)
and the ardour with which secular work was prosecuted to the
level of a religious duty in itself; from a mere method of providing
for material needs it became an end in itself, providing scope for
the exercise of faith within the labour of the “calling”. That gave
rise to that ideal of work for work’s sake which forms the intel-
lectual and moral assumption which lies behind the modem
338 See p. 893. 389 Cf. above, pp . 118-127. 340 Cf. above, pp. 2Q3-2Q6.
VOL. II. L
6io THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
bourgeois way of life . 341 Within Lutheranism, however, the
consequences of this conception only had a limited influence.
It is only in Calvinism that their full and strictly logical
effect appears. Luther’s view of vocation agreed with that
of Paul, the Early Church, and the Middle Ages. To him the
“calling” was simply the sphere of activity in which one was set,
and in which it was a duty to remain. He could see no meaning
or Divine sanction in the idea of a holiness which was higher
than the ordinary ethic of a Christian vocation. Although at the
same time Luther pointed out that it is precisely through the
ordered work of one’s calling, and the intricate network of mutual
service that the preservation of the whole community is effected,
and with that peace, order, and prosperity, he attributes it all
to the wise ordering and the kindly guidance of Providence, and
not to deliberate human initiative. The vocational system was
not consciously designed and developed for the purposes of the
holy community and of Christian Society, but it was accepted
as a Divine arrangement. The individual, moreover, regarded his
work, not as a suitable way of contributing to the uplift of Society
as a whole, but as his appointed destiny, which he received from
the hands of God. That is why it was possible for the Lutheran
to regard the work of his vocation in an entirely traditional and
reactionary way — as the duty of remaining within the traditional
way of earning a living which belongs to one’s position in Society.
This point of view coincides with the traditional Catholic view.
Christian morality was exercised in vocatione but not per voca-
tionem , 842 It is just at this point, however, that the difference
between Lutheranism and Calvinism is most manifest. Calvinism
aimed consciously and systematically at the creation of a Holy
Community . 343 It co-ordinated the activity of the individual
and of the community into a conscious and systematic form.
And since the Church as a whole could not be fully constituted
without the help of the political and economic service of the secu-
lar community, it was urged that all callings ought to be ordered,
purified, and enkindled as means for attaining the ends of the
Holy Community. Thus the ideal was now no longer one of
surrender to a static vocational system, directed by Providence,
841 On this point cf. especially Max Weber , who also analyses in detail the
linguistic origin of the Protestant conception of the “calling” from i Cor. vii. 20,
in connection with Eccles. xi. 20-21.
842 On this point cf. Weber: Archiv. XXI, 16-17; Lobstein , i43ff.
843 Here I would mention once more Eger's excellent book, Luthers Lehre vom
Beruf ; see also above, pp. 361-364,
PROTESTANTISM
611
but the free use of vocational work as the method of realizing the
purpose of the Holy Community. The varied secular callings
do not simply constitute the existing framework within which
brotherly love is exercised and faith is preserved, but they are
means to be handled with freedom, through whose thoughtful
and wise use love alone becomes possible and faith a real thing.
From this there results a freer conception of the system of callings,
a far-reaching consideration for that which is practically possible
and suitable, a deliberate increasing of the intensity of labour.
To what extent this rationality and mobility of the conception
of vocation was carried through in detail, in the presence of the
opposing conception of life with its “guild” and “police” spirit,
is quite another question. The instances of ecclesiastical social
politics in Geneva which will be cited farther on, however,
display considerable freedom of movement.
There is also another element which ought to be taken into
account, the significance of which will also only become fully
evident at a later stage. It is this : one of the special tasks of the
Holy Community was that of ascetic self-discipline in work, an
ascetic abstention from all worldly distractions in order to attend
to the duties of one’s calling, the renunciation of the utilization of
the profit gained by one’s labour for personal enjoyment; this
kind of asceticism produced, as an important by-product, that
ideal of hard work, of the prosecution of work for its own sake, as
a duty in itself, which is anything but a natural attitude of mind,
and which can only be understood in the light of a religious energy
which can thoroughly transform the natural instinctive life. Once
this psychological state of mind has been created, it can then,
through a process of metamorphosis of purpose, be detached
from its original meaning and placed at the disposal of other ideas ;
in various ways this process often takes place at the present day.
It is, however, precisely at this point that we can observe the
difference between nations which have been educated on Catholic,
Lutheran, or Calvinist lines.
To people who have been educated on Calvinistic principles
the lazy habit of living on an inherited income seems a downright
sin ; to follow a calling which has no definite end and which yields
no material profit seems a foolish waste of time and energy, and
failure to make full use of chances of gaining material profit
seems like indifference towards God. From the Calvinistic point
of view laziness is the most dangerous vice ; it is hurtful to the
soul from the standpoint of ascetic discipline, and harmful to the
community from the standpoint of social utilitarianism. In this
612 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
matter, however, Calvin himself did not perceive the full logical
result of his idea. His strongly aristocratic outlook, and his con-
nection with the French nobles, gave him a more broad-minded
and understanding conception of the services rendered by various
callings.
Huguenot Calvinism, within which the aristocratic element
predominated, was at first quite different in character; it only
became bourgeois after it had been disarmed and fettered; in
any case it was this development which made it more difficult
for the nobles to join the movement. The permanent remnant of
the Huguenot movement, and the Huguenot emigrants, certainly
display quite plainly that interest in trade and commerce which
is characteristic of a bourgeois society. In the last resort, however,
a bourgeois development of this kind was bound to take place as
a result of Calvin’s social ethic as well as of his ascetic rigorism.
It reached its full development in the bourgeois atmosphere of
the Calvinism of the Lower Rhine and of the Netherlands.
That was the kind of society which provided a congenial soil for
this religious ethic, just as the dualistic ethic of Catholicism suited
the graduated social system of mediaeval society. Just as the
agrarian-feudal and mediaeval city conception of life formed
the basis of mediaeval Christian civilization, and made the latter
possible, and was in return strengthened and permeated by it,
so the nascent bourgeois world was inwardly related to the ethic
of Calvinism, and in return it was religiously strengthened and
moulded by it into a spiritual and ethical force which was indepen-
dent of all mere fluctuations in sentiment and opinion . 344
Up to this point we have been dealing solely with the question
of the supernatural, spiritual ethic, which is produced by the grace
of election. This ethic, however, needed support in the natural
or universal ethic of civilization, such as the ethic of the Catholic
Church had already long possessed; all that Lutheranism had
done was to regulate afresh the relation between the two. This
function was exercised by the conceptions (with which we have
already dealt several times) of the moral Natural Law and of the
Law of Nature. It is precisely at this point, however, that there
emerges an important peculiarity of Calvinism. In the actual
wording of this theory Calvin certainly does not seem to be
using any different formulas from those employed by Luther and
Melancthon about the absolute Natural Law of the Primitive State,
and the relative Natural Law of the present day, adapted to the
conditions of fallen humanity . 345 Calvin speaks just as they did
844 See p. 894. 344 See p. 895.
PROTESTANTISM
613
about the identity of the Natural Law with the Decalogue, in
which, not only the Decalogue, but the whole Old Testament
Law and the history of Israel appear as illustrations of the Natural
Law ; 846 of the application of the Christian spirit to the social
institutions of the Natural Law, and of the corresponding division
of the Decalogue into two Tables, one of which concerns spiritual
and religious matters, and the other, the concerns of secular
morality ; 347 the argument that Positive Law is an application of
Natural Law, conditioned and altered by time and circumstances,
according to which the positive element in the Law of Moses
(Mosaic Code) and in Roman Law, and also in the present law
of the State, in civil and in criminal law, is to be understood as
the evolution of the Law of Nature, conditioned by time and
place . 348 Up to this point Calvin’s ideas seem to coincide exactly
with the Lutheran conception. Further, Calvin agrees with Luther
in a very strict demand for respect for authority, even in cases
where those who wield authority are not particularly estimable.
The same applies to Calvin’s exhortations to frugality, modesty,
and adaptation to existing circumstances and situations. Calvin’s
position seems to have been directly nearer to Luther’s positively
authoritative conception of the Law of Nature than to the ration-
alistic conception of Melancthon ; Luther’s ideas were certainly
in closer agreement with his personal instincts than Melanc-
thon’s . 349 In spite of that, however, it is precisely at this point
that we can discern a great difference between Calvin’s position
as a whole and that of Luther and Lutheranism.
This distinction appears first of all in two apparently external
points. The first point is that Calvin emphasized the difference
between absolute and relative Natural Law far less than Luther.
He continually describes the Decalogue and the Natural Law as
the eternal unchangeable rules of the Divine moral law; the
modification of the law by the fact of sin is only alluded to inci-
dentally, it is never dealt with in principle. The State in particular,
in the chief passages in which Calvin refers to it, is never regarded
as a mere antidote to the fallen State and a penalty for evil, but
it is always chiefly regarded as a good and holy institution,
appointed by God Himself. Nor is there ever any suggestion that
the original communism of love had been modified and trans-
formed into the institution of private property ; private property
likewise seems to be a directly Divine institution . 850 Far less
emphasis is laid, therefore, upon the contrast between the Primi-
846 See p. 896. 847 See p. 896. 848 See p. 896.
848 See p.897. 880 See p.898.
614 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
tive State and the fallen State [probably this was due to the
influence of the doctrine of Predestination] — rather, from the
outset political and economic institutions are regarded as Divine
institutions for the purpose of preserving social peace and harmony.
The Augustinian influences which had coloured the Lutheran
ethic of the State and of economics, which indeed even in Luther
belonged rather to his earlier period, have practically disap-
peared entirely; in Calvin’s mind the problem is simply this:
how can these Divine institutions most usefully be moulded to
serve the ends of a Christian society?
It is the same thing with the second point : Calvin’s conception
of the relation between the First and Second Tables of the
Decalogue. It is well known that Calvin makes the First Table
include four instead of three commandments, by reckoning the
command against image-worship as a commandment in itself;
to make things right he runs the Ninth and Tenth Commandments
into one. This is a feature of every Calvinist catechism. The deeper
significance of this change, however, lies in the fact that now the
general meaning of the First Table is not the demand for a spiritual
union with God, detached from and superior to the world, out
of whose interior depths alone goodness streams forth, but it is
that of a commandment which inculcates purity of worship
apart from pictures, magic, or ritual ceremonies, and lays great
stress on strict Sabbath observance. This entirely changes the
meaning of the First Table; it places purism of temper and of
worship on exactly the same plane as that of unconditional obedi-
ence. Hence the Lutheran tension between the absolute religious
morality of love of the First Table, and the social demands on
justice, compulsion, and force of the Second Table, disappears
altogether.
So far as Calvin, like Luther, describes spirituality as that
spirit which alone produces obedience to the Second Table of
the Law, inspiring it with the Christian spirit, he considers that
this spirituality consists in the radical severity and emotional
moderation of motive which springs from the “vision of the true
God, reverenced and recognized”, and not in the pure, loving
disposition which is opposed to the whole order of law . 351 Thus,
in connection with the “Two Tables”, we see the same process
at work as there was in the question of the distinction between
a “private” and a “public” ethic; while in Luther the differences
had already receded behind the formal character of a demand,
in Calvin they had altogether disappeared.
881 See p. 898.
PROTESTANTISM
615
There is, however, more in this than a mere wholesale adoption
of Luther’s later teaching which obliterated these distinctions.
A completely different spirit now prevails. Calvin scarcely ever
presents the products of relative Natural Law in the Family, in
the State, in Society, and in the sphere of economics as concessions
to the fact of sin, which must simply be tolerated ; almost always
he alludes to them as useful institutions for attacking evil, for
the furtherance of good, and for the realization of the glory of
God. From Calvin’s point of view the objections of the Anabaptists,
which Luther partially accepted, in the distinction which he
drew between private and public morality, and to which he only
added the reservation that the Gospel must not be turned into a
Law, seemed to be simply unpractical and fantastic nonsense.
Calvin’s one reply is to set against the views of the Anabaptists
the statement that the Divine Law cannot be divided, that whether
it be expressed in the Old Testament or in the New it is all one.
He adds that in his opinion their demands are against common
sense, since if they were realized they would do away with the
Law of Nature as well. Calvin regards the absolute Law of Nature
so little as the real standard, and takes for granted that the relative
Natural Law is a Divine institution, that he lays all the emphasis
on that which is practical, possible, and suitable. The result of this
attitude, however, is that the institution of the State and of Law
both can and must be adapted to the two following ends : (1) the
religious purpose of the maintenance of true religion; and (2) the
social and utilitarian end of the promotion of peace, order, and
prosperity. These two points are all that really matter; both,
however, are primarily the concern of the Government. Calvin
entirely excludes any idea of forming Society rationally on the
basis of the individuals which compose it, or from the point of
view of the “man in the street ”. 362 But, even so, the intellectual
atmosphere in which Calvin’s ideas of the State, of Law, and of
Economics are bathed is impregnated with a spirit of logical
purpose and rationality, which seems to have no connection with
the Lutheran attitude of pessimism 353 and mere toleration of all
these things. Further, however, Calvin is very cautious and
non-committal in his expression of opinion about the positive
forms of the State, since in them he perceives the idea of the State
conceived in terms of Natural Law, shaped by Positive Law in
8 52 Inst., IV, 20, 31 : “Quibus nullum aliud quam parendi et patiendi datum
est mandatum; de privatis hominibus semper loquor.” IV, 20, 8: “Et sane
valde otiosum esset, quis potissimus sit politiae in eo quo vivunt loco futurus
status, a privatis hominibus disputari” ! 853 See p. 898.
616 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
accordance with the historical situation, with national character-
istics, and with political necessity. These forms of the State,
however, correspond mostly nearly to the Law of Nature in which
it is possible to control and direct the governing authority in the
right path, as, for instance, monarchies with various social ranks
and legally empowered counsellors, aristocracies in which a
mutual influence is exerted upon the rulers, and, above all,
republics with a graded system of authority. This is the famous
theory of the “right of resistance” and of reform which belongs
to the magistrate inferieurs , who, if the supreme authority fails in its
duty, hold a Divine Commission, which entitles them to intervene
for the good of Society and the truth of religion. The private
individual alone is forbidden to interfere in public affairs; his
only duty is to suffer and obey. The official courts, however, are
authorized to make criticisms and to suggest reforms; they can
thus work towards the goal of a society framed and ordered
according to reason and to Nature. These views, however, breathe
into the whole a spirit which desires to see Society shaped and
moulded for a definite purpose, and a spirit which can criticise
law and authority according to the eternal standards of Divine
and Natural Law. Thus that claim which Luther only reluctantly
admitted later on as part of the positive German law of the Empire,
and which he always limited to the defence of religion against
foreign aggression, seemed to Calvin to belong from the very
beginning to the requirements of Natural Law, embracing the
whole rational ethical formation of the State, because it is this
which best develops a system of Positive Law, which provides the
necessary subordinate powers for the control and reprimand of
the supreme authority . 354 Although this theory still gives no place
in the political scheme to the private individual, the wall of
partition which prevents him from co-operating in the attempt
to introduce an ideal order of the State has worn very thin, and
will fall the moment that all the official courts cease to function.
In reality Calvin’s idea of Natural Law is nearer to the Catholic
idea of Natural Law than it is to the Lutheran conception from
which it started. In particular it has no trace of that specifically
Lutheran anti-rationalism, that glorification of authority for its
own sake, as the form which the structure of Society has developed
under the influence of sin, which it is possible for God-fearing
princes to use, with the blessing of God, for the good of the Church,
but which, as a rule, is only to be patiently endured, with all the
suffering this involves, as the very opposite of love. As we shall
954 See p. 899.
PROTESTANTISM
617
see later on, circumstances intensified this distinction, and it
assumed a fundamental significance for the whole history of the
development of Calvinism.
Social Theory of Calvinism
Finally, however, an Ethos of this kind means— and here we
come to the fifth point — the unified society, the Corpus Christianum ,
which is built up by the joint influence — different yet not divided
— of the sacred and the secular authority. As in Catholicism and
in Lutheranism, so also here, the dominant idea is that of a
Christian civilization, of a Christian society, of a compulsory
unity of Faith . 355 In Lutheranism this idea is conceived as the
voluntary charitable service of the authority instituted by Natural
Law, directed towards the ends of justice, natural peace and order,
placed at the disposal of the purely spiritual organ of salvation,
which must be endowed by the State with its legislative organs,
and supported by it in its spiritual activity.
In Calvinism this idea of the Corpus Christianum is regarded as
the union of the Government which discerns its duties — both
from the point of view of Christian and of Natural Law — in reason
and in the Bible, and the active independent Church, which
administers its own law of Divine justice for the Christianizing
of Society, and also works with the State in the spirit of a common
obedience to the Word of God. It is a uniform system of life and
of Society as a whole, inspired by one common ideal in things
secular and sacred, which therefore possesses a comprehensive
sociological fundamental theory, developed by the very same
methods used by Catholicism and Lutheranism to achieve the
same end . 356
Under the influence of the whole intellectual system of religious
thought Calvinism produces, as has already been noted above, a
quite different idea of personality from that of Lutheranism. The
Calvinist, alone with God and his own soul, feels within himself
the “grace of election” ; he uses it, and the effect on his own mind
is very different from that which fills the soul of a devout Lutheran
— whose main sentiment is one of loving self-surrender to God
and a loving self-giving to his neighbour — ; the Calvinist is filled
with a deep consciousness of his own value as a person, with the
high sense of a Divine mission to the world, of being mercifully
privileged among thousands, and in possession of an immeasur-
able responsibility. This idea of personality, however, which
arises out of the idea of predestination must not be confused
865 See p. 899. 856 See p. 899.
618 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
with modern individualistic and democratic ideas. Predestination
means that the minority, consisting of the best and the holiest
souls, is called to bear rule over the majority of mankind, who
are sinners. It includes the idea that the existing conditions of
life and authority — so far as they do not go against the Word of
God — are Divine ordinances, to which man must humbly and
willingly submit. Within these limits, however, Calvinism gives
a value to the personality of the elect soul which is thoroughly in
harmony with the idea of Kant, while in this respect Luther tends
to remain within the range of ideas controlled by mysticism.
Along with this strong emphasis upon personality, however,
the idea of fellowship is also defined in a peculiar way, a pheno-
menon which is most characteristic of Calvinism and which has
already been noted. Fellowship does not arise, as in the Lutheran
idea, merely directly out of the conditions of physical life, out of
the existing institutions of the Lex Naturae , out of the invisible
effects of the visible doctrine and use of the sacraments ; it arises
far more out of the predestinating Will of God itself. Fellowship
is not a method of working out the happiness of justification, in
which, however, the freed soul, certain of its God, never spends
itself wholly, but it is the purpose of justification and of sanctifica-
tion, into which all the energy of religious renewal ought to flow.
In spite of the isolation of the particular elect soul in the process
of the working out of election, the same fact of predestination
places the soul once more, in principle, in the fellowship which
uplifts, supports, tests, and educates its members . 367
This fellowship, like that of Israel, is always defined as a
national community. God makes His Covenant with each natipn
and requires loyalty in return for loyalty ; he educates the nation
by punishments and visitations, and gives His Word in order
that man should know His Will. Particular nations and churches,
however, are closely united among themselves, and have a very
strong mutual influence upon each other; all are for each and each
for all. The idea of international religious unity belongs to the
fundamental essence of Calvinism. A union of Christian nations,
in which each nation, in its own sphere of influence, realizes the
ideal of the Theocratic State; that is the Will of God, if its Scrip-
tural significance is rightly understood . 358
887 See p. 900.
888 On all these points see Choisy and Kuyper. The international character of
Calvinism was illustrated recently at the Geneva Jubilee, and is also displayed
in the active translation activity, by which everything of importance which
appears is translated into English for the benefit of the English-speaking
peoples. Kuyper’s book itself is a monument of this international spirit.
PROTESTANTISM 619
Thus this fundamental theory possesses neither the somewhat
vegetative character of the idea of the “organism”, (since it is
directed towards the conscious and clearly determined aim of the
individual), nor does it possess the Quietistic features of a pure
Patriarchalism ; rather, it combines a strong sense of authority
with the idea of the equal dominion of the law over all. Nor is
it the conception of Society from the standpoint of the free and
voluntary association, for it is produced by the guiding power of
Providence in the natural sphere, and by the power of predestina-
tion in the supernatural sphere. The creative Divine Will binds
together and unites all in one positive aim, to which all are com-
mitted, and from which all trace of arbitrary individual choice
has been removed. On the other hand, this idea of fellowship
is not conceived as the direction and unification of Society by
means of a tangible supernatural priestly government, since it
arises solely out of the common possession of the Spirit, and out
of that harmony with Divine and Natural Law which this effects.
Difficulties and complications are solved by the Bible, coupled
with the deliberate decision of conscience in the sight of God.
This fellowship is a common union in an objective Divine relation
of interest and purpose; to this end the particular individual
must dedicate his highest and freest personal energies, in which,
however, all are most closely united to each other through some-
thing which transcends all individualism.
Thus this conception of fellowship is an entirely new form of
the Christian sociological idea, in spite of the fact that its forms of
expression remind us in innumerable instances of the conceptions
of # Lutheranism, Catholicism, and the Primitive Church. Down
to the present day the peculiar nature of this structure stamps the
life of the Calvinistic peoples with a unique emphasis on the
cultivation of independent personality, which leads to a power of
initiative and a sense of responsibility for action, combined also
with a very strong sense of unity for common, positive ends and
values, which are invulnerable on account of their religious
character. This explains the fact that all the Calvinistic peoples
are characterized by individualism and by democracy, combined
with a strong bias towards authority and a sense of the unchange-
able nature of law. It is this combination which makes a conserva-
tive democracy possible, whereas in Lutheran and Catholic
countries, as a matter of course, democracy is forced into an
aggressive and revolutionary attitude . 359
869 Kuyper's whole book is steeped in these descriptions of the fundamental
theory contrasted with that of the European democracy of France. Hence he
draws the conclusion that the two distinct forms of democracy of America and
620 THE SOCIAL TEACHIWft t>F THE' CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Closely united with this new form of sociological fundamental
theory is the balance between the ideas of equality and of in-
equality which is peculiar to Calvinism, and the aspirations which
it evokes, both in democratic and radical, as well as in aristo-
cratic and conservative, movements. This question has always
constituted one of the main problems connected with the Christian
conception of Society ; it was always further complicated by the
fact that the Stoic doctrine, fused with the Christian social doctrines
from time immemorial, had always maintained that in the Primi-
tive State all men were equal, on the basis of the equal possession
of reason and the power of exercising it, and from that hypothesis
often enough equalitarian inferences for the present day had
been deduced. Similar ideas have also appeared within the
Christian doctrine of Society itself, especially among the sects,
and their influence has confused the issue, down to the present
day. In the midst of these complications Calvinism adopted a
decided position, based on the statement that equality and
inequality are nothing in themselves, and that their only value
consists in the varying relations of men to one another. In the
presence of God all men are equal, for in His sight all men are
sinners, and all are equally bound to obey Him. On the other
hand, in relation to each other they are unequal, for the Divine
Ruler of the world has ordained that some should serve, and some
should rule, as part of the essence of human life, and not as a
result of the Fall. The essence of the Divine Nature is not reason,
and that righteousness which satisfies all the demands of reason,
from which one can postulate the equality of all men. It is rather
that of the sovereign Will of the Ruler who elects one, and rejects
another, according to His eternal and inscrutable purpose, which
may not be measured by any order of reason which can be applied
to all alike.
Thus the whole social ideal of Calvinism is controlled by the
sense that human beings are unequal by Divine appointment,
and that the only equality which exists is that of incapacity to do
any good in one’s own strength, and the obligation to render
unconditional obedience to the Divine Will. The result is that the
main features of this social ideal are essentially conservative and
authoritative. The irrationality of God, of the order of the world,
and of election is most strongly emphasized, existing institu-
tions and governments are fully recognized . 360
of France are the two great world Powers of the future, whereas in his opinion
Germany seems foredoomed to weakness owing to its belief in pantheism.
8 «° See p. 901.
PROTESTANTISM 621
On the other hand, however, equality before God is not
conceived as a mere consolation, a higher point of view which
lifts the individual spiritually above the misery of earth, but
otherwise leaves everything just as it was before. On the con-
trary, this idea of equality, combined with the living spirit of
Church fellowship and of Calvinistic individualism, had a strong
practical influence upon actual conditions of life. The moral
tribunal has no respect of persons; its judgment applies even to
those in the highest position of all ; it reminds all continually of
their equality before God, and of their obligations to the Holy
Community. The ministers avoided with scrupulous care any
display of their position of authority, and in their weekly meetings
they appointed a different chairman each time ; discussions with
the laity about the truths of Scripture were instituted, in order
to abolish the distinction between the clergy and the laity. The
greatest possible emphasis was laid upon the idea that true
Christian dignity regards questions of rank and position as matters
of entire indifference, while on the other hand, every position of
privilege is regarded as an obligation to the whole community.
From the purely logical point of view there undoubtedly exists
an unsolved contradiction in this emphasis first on one element
and then on the other. Yet the main sociological problem of the
relation of the individual to the community, as soon as it becomes
a conscious problem in the stages of a higher intellectual develop-
ment, always remains antinomian. Calvinism has balanced the
two aspects of this antinomy in a very important and powerful
manner. In so doing, along with the organic and patriarchal
fundamental theory of the mediaeval idea of Society, Calvinism
has become the second great Christian definite social ideal of
European Society, which in its turn has also experienced a similar
deep and broad process of expansion. All other social theories
were, and are, too Utopian and too idealistic to be able to master
the harsh phenomenon of the struggle for existence, and the com-
plications introduced by self-interest. Indeed, the great importance
of the Calvinistic social theory does not consist merely in the fact
that it is one great type of Christian social doctrine ; its significance
is due to the fact that it is one of the great types of sociological
thought in general. In inner significance and historical power
the types of the French optimistic equalitarian democracy, of
State Socialism, of proletarian Communist Socialism, and of the
mere theory of power, are, in comparison with Calvinism, far
behind . 861
861 See p. 902.
622 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
In spite of its patriarchal spirit of authority, by means of this
balance between fellowship and individualism, authority and
freedom, compulsion and initiative, sobriety and enthusiasm,
aristocracy and democracy, Calvinism still had a positive influence
upon social ideals, not only within the sphere of the Church, but
within the whole sphere of Christian Society in general. To the
individual it gave the possibility of an extensive co-operation, and
a claim upon the whole, as far as this was possible within existing
limits. On the other hand, those who possessed social privileges
were laid under such heavy obligations to the community, and
their position of privilege was held to involve such self-sacrifice
for the good of the whole, which subordinates should meet with
reverence and trust, that all inequalities were swallowed up in a
system in which the powers of all were engaged in a mutual effort
for the good of the whole community. Calvinism was then, and
still is to-day, a united body, with a common feeling and a sense
of mutual responsibility among the Church members which, by
means of labour and criticism in common, continually subordinates
the common life afresh to ethical standards, and moulds it in
harmony with ethical principles. Here then — for the first time in
the history of the Christian ethic — there came into existence a
Christian Church whose social influence, as far as it was possible
at that period, was completely comprehensive. As we have
already seen, Calvinism was “Christian Socialism 55 in the sense
that it moulded in a corporate way the whole of life in the State
and in Society, in the Family, and in the economic sphere, in public
and in private, in accordance with Christian standards. It took
care that every individual member should receive his appointed
share of the natural and spiritual possessions of the community,
while at the same time it sought to make the whole of Society,
down to the smallest detail, a real expression of the royal dominion
of Christ.
From the preceding pages we see clearly why it was that only
now did it become possible to make an experiment in social
transformation in harmony with Christian ideals which was
initiated by the Church-type, founded on real principles, and
thorough in its effects and scope. Until that time, in the attempt
to realize the ideals of Primitive Christianity in a thoroughly
Christian organization of Society, the sect alone had led the way.
But as a sect it was immediately placed beyond the legal pale
of general civil society. Calvinism had, however, incorporated
into its idea of the Church so much of the sect-ideal that it was
obliged to make the bold attempt (i) of constituting its national
PROTESTANTISM 623
church as a church of professing believers, and (2) of constituting
its unity of Church and State as a Christian society in the strict
sense of the personal Christian faith and character of each indi-
vidual member. On the other hand, however, Calvinism did so
far remain a “Church” that it never questioned the ideal of a
unity which included Society and the State, natural life and
worship, and the separation of a holy separate community from
the ordinary life of humanity always remained a crime. In order,
however, to be able to attain both these ideals, in the last resort
it found it necessary to modify and transform the real ideals of
the Gospel in order to make them agree with its attachment to
the popular morality of the Old Testament. It was by the adapta-
tion of those Gospel ideals to the Old Testament and to the natural
ethic that Calvinism so far adjusted itself to the practical condi-
tions of life that it became possible to carry them out in practice.
Even so, the demands that were left were highly pitched enough.
In the severe earnestness of the religious excitement of the time,
and under the pressure of great conflict for a hundred years,
Calvinism actually succeeded in carrying out its ideal.
At the same time, as we have already indicated, this “Christian
Socialism” was quite different from its modern counterpart of
any kind. It retained the institution of the sanitary police (which
was part of the life of a mediaeval town), and the system of regula-
tions and supervision created by the Guild- spirit, though without
their monopolistic rigidity. But whereas in these previous develop-
ments a Christian Socialism had already been formed, which had,
however, remained under the control of the secular and civil
authorities, the Church co-operating with the Government now
took these matters systematically in hand. This ecclesiastical
Socialism gave way certainly to the pressure of modern political
and social developments. When, however, the technical and social
effects of these developments revealed their dubious tendency,
once again it was Calvinism which came forward with a new
“Christian Socialism”, adjusted to modern conditions, yet still
bearing traces of the Puritan spirit . 362
Thus here also, in the last resort, the peculiar essence of
Calvinism consists in the combination of the main ideas of Church
and Sect in the sense of a fellowship, based upon religion,
which, in spite of all that, is still new and original. It is this
also which determines the form of its sociological fundamental
theory. From this point of view we can understand how Calvinism
is able to combine the most alert and active individualism with a
##a See p. 903.
624 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
solidarity which admits all social differences and relates them to
each other, its intensification of the sense of personality and at
the same time its inclusion (in the scheme of things) of the
collective activity of politics and economics, its emphasis
upon the equality of all men in the sight of God, and of the
inequality of earthly vocations which involves the need for mutual
service, its revolutionary habit of measuring all Society by an
ideal standard, and its conservative sense for the need of law and
order, for authority for actual historical situations.
So much for the religious and ethical special characteristics of
Primitive Calvinism ; it is actually a new spirit. Upon the whole,
everywhere it maintained this spirit, all through that century of
vast conflicts, by which, above all, it saved Protestantism from
the policy of the Counter-Reformation. Yet in it all there is
nothing, consciously and theoretically, that goes beyond the
general intellectual level of the sixteenth century, beyond the
ancient Catholic, Lutheran, Baptist, or Humanist ideas which
prevailed at that time. All that its contemporaries perceived as
its distinctive feature was its anti-Catholic radicalism. Lutherans
in particular were only conscious of differences in doctrine and in
worship. Calvin tried to treat these differences as though they
were merely external and terminological, and he strove to main-
tain the unity of Protestantism as a whole. It was the Lutherans
alone who broke the unity, separating from Calvinism as though
it were a heresy worse than that of Nestorius or Muhammad.
The thinkers of that period concentrated their attention almost
entirely upon dogma, and they scarcely perceived that the real
heart of the difference lay in the sphere of ethics and of social
doctrine. In actual fact this difference only expressed itself
tangibly in the peculiar energy which Calvinism displayed in
international diplomacy and the organization of churches ;
everywhere it was busily at work, using every apparently open
door in order to gain an entrance to foreign Courts, or to penetrate
into the life of foreign peoples. Calvin’s corespondence reveals a
theological diplomacy and a strategy which embraced the
Continent. Where substantial success had been gained, Calvin
required a complete break with the rites and ceremonies of the
Established Church, and a public confession of faith, which was
just as important as an entirely new structure and the organization
of a community free from “devilish errors”. In this policy Calvin
parted company entirely with Lutheranism, which was every-
where ready to make concessions to the ancient Church, wherever
the pure preaching of justification by faith was permitted, com-
PROTESTANTISM
625
mitting all the rest to the miraculous power of the Holy Spirit.
This energy, therefore, is the direct secret of the success with
which Calvin outdistanced both Lutheranism and the Anabaptist
movement. The programme of the new Church, which spread
from Geneva outwards, and stamped a new character upon the
nations which accepted it, may be summarized thus: a radical
break with tradition ; a new Church organization on the principles
of Calvinistic church-order, and the international relationship
of the new churches which support each other in things material
and spiritual.
In all this there is no appreciable advance towards modern
civilization. When, however, a rapprochement of this kind continu-
ally pushes its way to the front as an actual fact, and when,
finally, it appears that it has been caused by the development of
Calvinism — even though in a very one-sided direction — without
any departure from Calvinistic principle, it is evident that this
rapprochement cannot have arisen out of the religious and ethical
fundamental ideas themselves, but that it must be due to an
adjustment of these ideas to actual conditions, which at first,
scarcely visible, still contained within itself the possibility of future
transformations. At the same time, from the very outset this
adaptation must have been based inwardly upon the spirit of
Calvinism. This particular religious and ethical feature must
have been already present in germ in an indissoluble inward
connection with the existing political and social conditions of
civilization, whose results then came to light in the development
of Calvinism, and made possible to it a capacity of adaptation
to the modern bourgeois-capitalistic civilization which was lack-
ing in Catholicism and in Lutheranism, or at any rate which did
not appear to this extent. Only thus can we understand the
comparatively direct development of Calvinism, which led,
however, to a result so different from primitive Calvinism.
Primitive Calvinism and Geneva
In reality this is what took place. Since from the very beginning
the Genevan situation helped to determine Calvin’s political,
social, and economic ideal, it led to that adaptation to conditions
which only revealed its full significance at a much later period.
Therefore we must now inquire to what extent Calvinism itself
was influenced by the general cultural situation in Geneva . 368
The first effect of the Genevan situation can be stated very
883 The same formulation of the problem in March 1 Coligny, /, /, p. 266. Here
I am only trying to go somewhat further than Marcks.
VOL. II. M
6a6 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
simply: here alone there were actual conditions within which
it was possible to realize Calvin’s ideal of a holy community . 364
The ideal which was occupying Calvin’s mind was also influencing
wide circles of the Reformation movement in Germany . 366 It
was only in the States ruled by sovereign princes that there was
no prospect of realizing this ideal, since it threatened their royal
power. In the great and independent city-republics it came into
conflict just as sharply with the traditional power of the great
families, which was again becoming dominant after the shattering
events of the Reformation. Even in Zurich, Zwingli was obliged
to hand over his ideal to the secular authority in the State. In
Strassburg, Lutheranism and the oligarchy destroyed the modest
attempts begun by Bucer. Geneva’s neighbour, the powerful
State of Berne, did not merely provide the clearest example of
this kind of the exploitation of the Reformation in the interests of
the oligarchy — it was also particularly hostile to Calvin ; all along
it made life difficult for him, and it opposed the introduction of
the independent Calvinist Church into the State, fearing that its
own Church government might be endangered by this bad
example. The fate, however, with which Berne threatened its
neighbours hung over all the small dependent communities in
Germany which desired to organize “Puritan Lay Christianity”
in an independent congregational church. The danger of infection
with these ideas was resolutely combated by the territorial lords
or the neighbouring princes; finally, those who upheld these
ideals saw no other course to pursue than to drift into the Baptist
movement . 386
In Geneva alone, on the contrary — which had won its political
freedom and its constitution in the struggle against its bishop
and against Savoy, and whose freedom was indissolubly bound
up with the maintenance of the Reformation — where a young
Government, without 367 traditions, was facing a very complicated
884 Cf. also von Bezjold: K. d. G., II, V, /, p. 81 ; also Marchs' Coligny .
865 On this point sec Barge: Karlstadt. This must make us cautious about
accepting the view that Calvinism represents the specifically French and Latin
aspect of the Reformation ; see also Hundeshagen, I, p. 2g3 ; Richer , p. 59 ; and
Marchs' Coligny, I, 1 , p. 287 ; the right restrictions of this statement in Marchs,
pp. 28g and 2g6. On Zwingli’s reform in this respect, see Kreuzer: Zwinglis Lehre
von der Obrigheit, igog (Kirchenrechtl. Abdh . hg. v. Stutz, JVr. 57).
868 Cf. Rothenburg's History of the Reformation in Barge, II, 2gg~3f3\ secessions
to the Anabaptists, II, 432 Jf.
887 Cf. the Jubilee inscription composed by Beza in 1 584, in which “the Restora-
tion of the religion and the ancient liberties of Geneva* * are summarized ;
see Choisy: L'itat chritien, p. 233 .
PROTESTANTISM
627
political situation, was it possible to establish a community of
that kind, which by the very fact of its own stability also gave
coherence, support, and strength to the State, through the genius
of its leader also providing a firm support for the political leaders.
Even in Geneva, however, the old families inclined towards a
State Church on the Bernese pattern, and Calvin only overcame
their opposition after heated struggles ; in the end, however, he
was successful. He was then able to establish a Church which
obeyed the magistrates in all external questions, and exercised
an independent system of discipline ; its stability was secured by
the permanent presidency of Calvin himself ; the Church was the
backbone of the young and immature State. Only thus was Calvin
able to create a holy community which directed its own affairs in
freedom according to the Word of God, protected by its pastors
as its tribunes, and kept pure through the exercise of discipline,
in agreement with the authorities. The general significance of this
phenomenon consists precisely in this: we have here the union
of a national Church and a voluntary Church, of the Church
as the organ of salvation and the sect-ideal, a moulding of the
common life on Christian-Socialistic lines which is impossible
without the organized rule of Christian thought over Society;
that, however, means (since in the end these ideals can only be
represented purely and with full knowledge by the ministers)
that Society cannot be influenced in this way unless the Church
is supreme over Society. Every effort may be made to remove all
traces of a hierarchy; the greatest possible emphasis may be laid
upon the independence of the secular authority within its own
sphere ; the free co-operation of each individual may be enlisted
to the fullest extent; all this was done in Geneva: still, it is
perfectly plain that unless the Church is supreme — unless she
controls the State and social life in general — the whole thing is
impossible. This is why this first thorough and extensive social
evolution of Christianity was also the most theocratic. In his
teaching on the independence and secular character of the State
Calvin used exactly the same language as Luther ; since, however,
at the same time he created a strong independent Church (based
on the assumption of the Corpus Christianum common to all three
confessions) through which he desired to effect a Christian and
ethical transformation of the whole of Society and civilization,
in practice he made the State subordinate to the Church.
But although the actual situation in Geneva thus made it
possible to establish Calvinist Christianity, yet on the other hand,
in its strong admission of the independence and validity of all
628 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
secular institutions based on reason, this close relationship between
Society and the Church also had a strong reflex influence upon
the ethic and the social ideals of the Church of Calvin.
Democratic Tendency of Primitive Calvinism
The first sign of this influence can be traced in a certain demo-
cratic constitutional tendency which the Genevan experiment pro-
duced. It is, of course, possible to point out that Calvin’s personal
point of view was as undemocratic and authoritarian as possible ;
that, further, in spite of the fact that the whole community shared
in the life of the Church, Calvin’s Church Constitution, with its
basis in the Divine Church order and with its special connection
with the aristocratic constitution of the city, was still in no sense
a congregational democracy, 868 and, finally, that the Genevan
Constitution itself, under the influence of Calvin, and in line with
the spirit of the period, developed more in the direction of an
oligarchy than of a democracy. 369 That is all quite true. Neverthe-
less, in the last resort, the final effect of this interpenetration of
a city-republic with a national Church was a strong impulse in
the direction of democracy, towards the principle of the sovereignty
of the people. The reason for that is that the whole aim of the
Government was to secure the reasonable welfare of the individual
which is required by the Law of Nature, and in this sense the
State was to be conformable to reason.
A far greater influence in the direction of democracy was,
however, exercised by the fact that the final and decisive method
of influencing the political authority in this sense was the appeal
to public opinion, and to the electors, through the sermon. Jn
all cases of difficulty the Cri au Peuple was the ultima ratio of Calvin
and of his successors. Calvin worked against the dominant families,
and influenced the elections, by stirring up the masses by his
preaching, and by the use of denunciation and the censure of
ungodly or unreasonable laws. The famous section in Calvin’s
Institutes in praise of the republican constitution, the ardour of
subjects for its preservation, and the duty of the authorities to
respect it, appears first in those editions which were published
after 1543, as a later interpolation in the text, which had other-
wise remained unaltered since 1536. 370 During the first century
of Calvinism, then, this right to the Cri au Peuple was also a con-
868 See p. 904.
389 The increasing oligarchy in Geneva in Marcks ’ Coligny , /, /, p. sgg, which
emphasizes Calvin’s share in this development; see, further, Choisy: Vitat
chritien , p. 148. 370 See p. 905.
PROTESTANTISM
629
tinual subject of controversy between the magistrates and the
ministers, as can be seen from the records of both bodies. Through-
out this controversy the ministers always insisted on their con-
scientious view, which they emphasized very strongly, namely,
that they had no right to be “dumb dogs”, but that they were
the tribunes of the people. By their outspoken criticisms they
repeatedly intimidated the Council, which repeatedly requested
that difficulties of this kind might be discussed in private before
they were ventilated from the pulpit. It was only towards the
end of the century that the Council succeeded in limiting the
freedom of the ministers . 371 In actual fact, however, the policy
of the Consistory really amounted to an appeal to the people
as the actual sovereign authority. This becomes still more evident
w'hen we remember that in all these matters the main questions
were concerned with the interest of the people, with righteous
legislation, with the administration of relief funds, with situations
of economic and political distress, with bad customs and the like.
In spite of the respect for authority inculcated by Calvinism, and
the duty of obedience which was laid upon the private citizen,
this was its real motto : By the people and for the people.
It is, therefore, not at all strange that Calvin’s most loyal
disciple and follower, Beza, in face of the Massacre of St.
Bartholomew, and the irremediable godlessness of the French
Government, finally altogether discarded the theory of the duty
of subjects to be obedient, and that for such cases of need he
frankly proclaimed the sovereignty of the people as the ultimate
court of appeal. That is the meaning of his little tractate de jure
mggistratuum, the authorship of which has only recently been
attributed to him with certainty. His view of the question was
still no rationalistic artificial law of the State, with State treaties
and the like, but only the fundamental simple idea, that Divine
and Natural Law make the people the ultimate source of law
when all other appeals break down ; also that violent revolution is
permitted, if no other means are left; that the authorities are
bound by the positive laws which in any way contain the Natural
Law, and that if these are lacking they are still bound to observe
the Natural Law, which is tacitly assumed, and, in a case of
tyrannical injury, it is permissible to warn the authorities by the
courts which are called to that duty, and if their own conscience
does not function they may be compelled to obey the law. This
implies the sovereignty of the people, the right of revolution,
and the binding nature of a constitution. All this, however, is
871 See p. 905.
630 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
imbedded in a mass of qualifying statements and modifications,
which combine with this democratic individualistic spirit both
the early Christian doctrine of authority and submission to
authority, and the doctrine of Divine Right and the Divine
appointment of the traditional authority. Beza points out that
all these rights and duties do not directly concern the private
individual, but only those whose legal standing in some way
involves them in these questions : e.g. professional groups, lower
magistrates, elective bodies, which have been appointed and
commissioned to represent the interests of the people. Further,
the point at issue is not an abstract question of moulding Society
according to reason, but one of either improving or replacing
a bad Government, whereupon then the old historic, and there-
fore Divine, rights again come into force ; finally, all this is only
permitted against a Government which has really deteriorated
into tyranny, that is, against an executive power which per-
manently disregards Natural and Divine Law, and which in
principle disobeys both the First and Second Tables of the
Decalogue. Beza’s theory is still a compromise between the
doctrines of the Divine nature of authority which supports, and
carries forward, the process of history under the guidance of God,
and of the Christian duty of passive obedience enjoined by the Bible,
with Calvinistic individualism and its rational ideal of Society,
which is practically realized in the execution of one’s real duty
for the glory of God, and whose inner meaning is summed up
in the phrase, “We must obey God rather than man”. Even with
Calvin it had been a compromise. Beza simply emphasized
the individualistic, rational, and democratic element still more
strongly. Beza himself suggests what it was which made this
development of the theory possible by his appeal to the welfare
of the people as the aim of the State, and by his claim for the
right of appeal to the people against the Government, which
logically involved the right of actual armed resistance as well.
The rational idea of Natural Law in Calvinism, which was
included in the Calvinistic ethic and combined with Christian
individualism, here reveals its significance and its logical results . 872
Beza and the “Monarchomachi”
Beza used to expound these theories to an international body
of students, but the Council decreed that his book must be pub-
lished anonymously. It had, however, a positive and personal
connection with a whole series of similar famous publications
871 See p. 906.
PROTESTANTISM
631
by theologians, jurists, and politicians. Hotmann read the
manuscript, and it seems probable that both men planned the
Franco-Gallia and Beza’s treatise at the same time. These two
men, together with Henri Estienne and Gentillet, discussed the
theory and the literary plan of campaign . 373 This is the literature
of the so-called Calvinistic Monarchomachi or “opponents of
monarchy”, to which belong also the founder of the independent
Calvinistic ethic, Lambert Danaus, and men like Duplessis-
Mornay, the author of the Vindicae contra tyrannos , an energetic
supporter of the Centre Party in Calvinistic theology, diplomacy,
and Church organization. It was at Beza’s suggestion, too, that
the first report of the Massacre of St. Bartholomew was reissued,
under the title of De furoribus Gallicis , although its actual author
was the pastor Ricant; the orthodox theologian Jurieu also
defended these theological, ethical, and political theories.
In the whole of this literature, the ideas which Beza had
developed, which represented the doctrine of the school of
Geneva, reappear, with various adjustments and expansions,
undoubtedly practically determined by the irreconcilable op-
position to the French Crown, and by the fact of the Huguenot
and Netherlands Revolt; but these ideas were still only a con-
ceptually theoretical deduction from Calvinistic fundamental
principles, and they were therefore characteristic in their range
of ideas and possibilities. In all the literature of this kind the
sovereignty of the people, the social contract, the right of
revolution, the legal obligations of rulers, stand out very clearly;
just as clearly, however, there appear also the genuinely Cal-
vinistic limitations of all radical statements about Natural Law
b^ the idea of historic, and therefore of Divine, right, and by the
assumption that in principle humanity is unequal.
The idea of a social contract, in particular, which is here
introduced, is very far removed from its later purely rationalistic
realization, which it experienced in the classical modern Natural
Law of the Enlightenment, set free from theology. At no point
does it deal with the question of the formation of Society itself
on the basis of a social contract. Society rather is regarded in
the light of the Aristotelian-organic theory; it is the formation
of Society through Nature and reason with the common subor-
dination of the differently placed members through the law
which expresses reason. It is always first of all a question of the
contract of sovereignty, which, it is assumed, is contained by
Natural Law in every kind of sovereignty, and which has no
873 Cartier , pp. 204 ff.
632 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
need at all of any positive legal formulation, although such a
formulation is mostly, in point of fact, present, and only needs
to be brought forward again out of the old popular and class
laws.
At the same time this social contract according to Natural
Law is interpreted essentially in the light of the Old Testament
Scriptures, in which it is regarded as a covenant between God
on the one hand and the ruler and people on the other; it is
thus something quite different from the primitive social contract
of classical Natural Law. The ideas of Natural Law and of
a covenant are applied in a thoroughly theological manner,
since they represent an original archetypal ingredient contained
in the Bible and in every governmental relationship, whose aim
is not so much that of making possible a rational construction
of the State as that of the exercise of a moral and religious
control of the dominant historic powers. Nowhere is there any
question of a radical new structure of the State which would
be indifferent towards the Divine right of that which had grown
up through history. Therefore no kind of definite State organiza-
tion is deduced from this, but, as in the case of Calvinism, it
is left to the play of circumstances. The Calvinistic idea of the
mutual obligations of the people and the ruling power, and of
the significance of the elective corporations of the subordinate
authorities, were only further developed, certainly in a sense
which corresponds more to the Thomist and Humanist conception
of Natural Law than to the strongly Lutheran authoritarianism
of Calvin . 374
John Knox *
John Knox and the Scottish School went farther than Beza and
the Huguenots in their departure from the original Calvinist politi-
cal programme, but even they did not accept the purely rational-
istic modern ideas of Natural Law. In his pre-Calvinist period
John Knox had been influenced by John Major, who — although
he remained a Catholic — advocated the Catholic doctrine (with
which we are already familiar) of the sovereignty of the people
with a strong democratic emphasis. This teaching seems to have
left a deep and enduring impression upon Knox. It seems prob-
able that this accounts for his harsh remarks abopt the murder
of tyrants during this period. While he was in Geneva, Knox,
under Calvin’s influence, accepted and assimilated the Genevan
principles without any reservations. He then instructed the
874 See p. 908.
PROTESTANTISM 633
Scottish and English nobles in their duty towards the cause of
reform. He told them that, as magistrate inferieurs they were both
entitled, and indeed bound, to support the cause of religious
reformation, and to aid the Government in this question ; so far
as resistance was concerned, he added, they were only justified
in that attitude for the sake of the Gospel and of evangelical
reform ; he deprecated the use of violence, however, and in all
secular matters he enjoined strict obedience. When, however,
Knox found that this policy rendered it impossible to attain the
necessary means of power, and when he saw the danger that
both in England and in Scotland the Queens would marry
foreign Catholic sovereigns, which would lead to a systematic
and entire suppression of the Gospel, he was forced into a
position of resolute opposition to the hereditary monarchy, whose
right of inheritance could lead to such madness, and which
ensured no kind of protection at all against godless and unjust
tyrants. He then demanded that monarchs should be chosen and
controlled in exactly the same way as judges, and declared that
the magistrate infirieurs possessed both the right and the duty of
leading armed resistance against the “Tyrant”, up to the point
of capital punishment. Finally, indeed, he summoned private
persons, through voluntary associations and on their own initia-
tive, into the work of religious reformation and the formation
of churches, implying also that if necessary they ought to take
an aggressive share in the exercise of political power.
Doctrine of Popular Sovereignty
This is the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people, based
oil reason and on Scripture, the theory of the right and duty
of violent resistance to godless rulers, even to the point of capital
punishment if necessary, for the doctrine of the Covenant, and
of the right to urge the people to revolt, and to fight for the
sake of the Gospel. This doctrine was advocated by many sup-
porters of the Calvinist ethic; in Scotland it was upheld mainly
by Buchanan, who at the same time reveals a very strong
Humanist tendency. It was the doctrine of the Scottish and
English Presbyterians under the Stuarts, the doctrine of the
Generals in Cromwell’s Army, who, in the prevailing confusion,
regarded thenjselves as the only legitimate authority which was
left. This is the doctrine which cost Charles I his head. But, for all
that, its spirit is not republican, nor in harmony with the Natural
Law of reason; nor is it Scriptural and conservative, and in
harmony with the conception of Natural Law. The aim of this
634 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
doctrine is only to control the Government in power in accordance
with the principles of the rights of the people and the good of
the Christian Church; so far as possible it is legitimist, and it
is loyal to the most legitimist powers which still remain, after
the actual legitimate authority has broken down. It is not con-
cerned with building up the State rationally from the standpoint
of the rights of the individual ; it only desires to control the powers
that be according to the principles of the natural constitution
of every State — that is, according to the Bible and the Natural
moral Law.
In this sense both the English and the Scottish Presbyterians
were Legitimists. Cromwell himself was no theoretical republican,
but a man who believed in legitimate authority, who allowed his
hand to be forced by events, till they drove him into the situation
in which his political genius for government could develop, and
then he had to obey his own laws.
The meaning of the whole theory has always been that which
Knox expressed in his famous interview with Mary Stuart. She
accused him of striving for power, of being an enemy of royalty
and an instigator of rebellion. Knox replied : “God forbid that
I should grasp at the exercise of power or set subjects free to do
exactly as they like. My one aim is that Prince and people alike
should obey God .” 375
Althusius
The first step towards a rational construction of the State, and of
the whole of Society, from the point of view of popular sovereignty,
was taken by Althusius, who appealed to the example of the
Netherlands, just as the opponents of monarchy had evolved their
theory after their hopes in the French Monarchy had been
shattered. Althusius was a strict Calvinist ; he began his career
as a master at the Calvinist Academy at Herborn; he then
became Chief Magistrate of the Imperial city of Emden, on the
frontier of the new Dutch republic; later he was called to
Franeker, and then to Leyden, as a recognized leader in the
Calvinistic doctrine of the State. Quite deliberately Althusius
wished to make politics independent of ethics, theology, philo-
sophy, and jurisprudence ; he desired to gather up the scattered
materials which were then in existence in order to construct a
new and independent discipline, utilizing the Natural Law and
the Decalogue merely as bases upon which the actual political
theory could then be built up. At the same time he held firmly
875 See p. 909.
PROTESTANTISM 635
to the idea of a Christian society, and to the idea of close agree-
ment between Church and State ; to this extent, therefore, he was
still in line with the general thought of Calvinism. The net result
of his teaching, however, was to dissolve the compromise which
until then had existed between the historic idea of Divine Right
and the rights of individuals. This was due to the following
reasons : Althusius based his doctrine upon the theory of the
original freedom and equality of mankind in the state of Nature,
which in its turn produced Society in all its forms as a vast
series of associations, rising with increasing degrees of complexity,
through the corporation, the parish, the province, to a climax
in the State. This theory was based on the idea of a social con-
tract, whether explicit or implicit, and this distinguished it from
the territorial sovereignty which alone had been taken into
consideration up to that time ; sovereignty is vested in the whole
body of the people ; both the “ephors” and the “chief magistrate”
(or the magistrates and the King) only possess their authority
as the delegates of the people. The main trend of his thought
was influenced by the Humanistic ideas of Stoicism, by the theory
of pure Natural Law. In this theory Althusius has discarded the
view, current for so long, that the State must be ruled by its
supreme ruler in harmony with the principles of Divine and
Natural Law, through intermediate courts which take into account
the rights of the people and the interests of religion ; rather he
constructs his theory of Society from the point of view of the
freedom and equality of individuals, together with those limi-
tations required by the conditions which govern an ordered
Society designed to serve the end of the Christian meaning of
life . 376
Grotius
Hugo Grotius, however — the thinker through whom the Law
of Nature and the contract theory first gained their importance
in world history — explicitly severed the connection between these
theories and Calvinism, strove to replace the Calvinist State
Church system by a policy of toleration based on rationalistic
and political motives, explicitly rejected the anti-monarchic
doctrine as the starting-point of his political theory, and on the
theological side became an adherent of that Humanistic Rational-
ism which from the days of Erasmus had never entirely lost its
influence, and which reappeared in the Arminian theology.
Starting from the idea of the equality and freedom of the Primi-
876 See p. 910.
636 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
tivc State, he taught that the State was founded in contract,
whose purpose was the purely rational aim of the common good ;
into this theory he incorporates a theory of international law
(in The Law of War and Peace), which totally excludes all thought
of Wars of Religion at all. In spite of the fact that Grotius him-
self was a devout Christian, these theories were formulated from
an entirely secular point of view. The further history of this
doctrine, therefore, does not belong to the history of Calvinism,
but to that of the rational idea of Natural Law, whose democratic
or anti-democratic development, from this time forward, had
only a very loose connection with Christian thought. Grotius’s
point of view was aristocratic, not democratic. In his case,
however, that had nothing to do with religious motives; it was
due to purely rational and political considerations; it is well
known that Grotius, as a supporter of John of Olden-Barneveldt,
was on the side of the merchant aristocracy. The contrast between
Calvin’s phrase, “ Stat (in the Being of God) pro ratione voluntas ”,
and the doctrine of Grotius, that the Law of Reason would still
be valid even if — per impossibile — there were no God, throws a
lurid light upon the great gulf which separates these two worlds.
In taking this stand, Grotius’s position, like that of Leibniz, was
closer to the Catholic theory of Natural Law than to the Cal-
vinist, or even to the Lutheran theories. In reality this is a new
world. When Society is constructed on a rational basis, and
individualism is based upon the equality and freedom of the
reason of individuals, then the spirit of Calvinism has disappeared,
and we are faced with the fact that the rationalistic ideas of
Stoicism have been set free from their fusion with Christian
thought, and that this has given rise to a specifically modern
individualistic habit of mind. In granting the religious conscience
exemption from the duties of the contract with the State, so far
as these were retained, as in the Anglo-Saxon world, it preserved
some traces of Calvinism, although Spinoza also made a similar
exception on purely philosophic grounds. But in the Natural Law
of French Democracy, and, above all, in Rousseau’s theory, every
trace of the Calvinist spirit has disappeared . 377
Locke
John Locke, the second great founder of the modern theory
of Natural Law, can only be connected with Calvinism and its
conception of the Christian Natural Law with certain reserva-
tions. Locke had been educated, it is true, in a Calvinist atmo-
911 See p. 910.
PROTESTANTISM
637
sphere by his father, who was a Puritan soldier. His whole nature
had a tendency towards a Calvinistic sobriety, industry, and
utilitarian objectivity, and the whole temper of his mind was
always characterized by a piety which was as fine and clear as
it was warm and earnest. Early in life, however, he had formu-
lated an essentially independent conception of Puritanism, and
his later theories of the Church and of toleration belong to the
sect-type and not to Calvinism. On the other hand, equally
early in life, he conceived theology in a latitudinarian sense,
and later on, under the influence of the Arminians and the
Socinians, he developed these ideas in his own peculiar, very able,
and original way, which was, however, entirely non-Calvinistic.
The latter then combined with the former, so that his advocacy of
freedom of worship also meant freedom for philosophical and
theological interests, and security for freedom of thought outside
the churches. Moreover, his liberal constitutional theory of the
State is obviously connected with the theory of the Christian
Natural Law of the Calvinistic, scholastic kind. He acknowledged
his indebtedness to Hooker, whose Ecclesiastical Polity , in its first
part, is an epitome of rational Christian Natural Law; in the
second part, however, in honour of Elizabethan Anglicanism,
it is twisted into a theory of the monarchy as the expression
of the will of the people, supported by the obedience of the
Church ; this is a great contrast to the majority of the Anglican
exponents of political science, whose views found their clearest
expression in the absolutism of Filmer’s Patriarcha , which was
similar to the Lutheran doctrine of authority. But although
Lqcke’s theory of Natural Law bears a great deal of resemblance
to the Calvinistic theory, particularly in the following points:
in the theory of the mutua obligation in the idea that the contract
of sovereignty is tacitly contained in all State organizations, in
the theory of the purely earthly and utilitarian character of the
State, and of the right of the people to control and depose their
rulers, his theory of Natural Law is fundamentally differently
conceived. He blends the various ingredients which composed
the previous theories of Natural Law in an entirely fresh way;
he starts neither from Stoic rationalism nor from Scriptural
revelation, but from a utilitarian empiricism, from which, how-
ever, he often reverts towards the older ideas. His Natural Law
results psychologically from the idea of the equality and freedom
of all mankind in the Primitive State ; in his conception the state
of Nature was one in which peace and reason prevailed ; men
possessed equal natural rights to life, liberty, and property, and,
638 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
in order to maintain these rights, the individuals, by means of
a social contract, formed a body politic. This body had the power
to protect these natural rights of man; and out of this social
contract there arose the forms of government which individuals
found necessary for their welfare. This Natural Law is under
Divine guidance, it is true, and is Divinely reiterated in the
Decalogue, and is thus in agreement with Revelation; but that
which it produces is solely for the good of individuals, and not
for the glory of God.
The ecclesiastical communities stand completely alongside of the
State, and are free associations which in all political and moral
questions must adjust themselves to the order of the State; they
are free only in worship and theology. Locke feared nothing so
much as priestly domination, whether it be Catholic, Anglican,
or Presbyterian in form. When friction arises (and this can never
be entirely avoided) between Church and State in ethical ques-
tions, Locke certainly recommends passive obedience, quite in
the manner of Calvin ; in the case of permanent injustice on the
part of the ruler of a State he would permit revolt, and the
resistance of those who are most justified to do so, to the extent,
finally, of revolution, since — and to him this is part of the moral
order — we must obey God rather than man.
Further, Locke regarded the ruling authorities which have
emerged from the process of history as — indirectly — appointed
by God, and he was a firm supporter of the positive law of that
period, which to him in England* seemed to be a particularly
happy incorporation of Constitutional Natural Law, and which
also implicitly contains this Natural Law as its own presup-
position, and its own standard. But these loud echoes of the
Calvinistic Christian Natural Law do not drown the underlying
tones, which are quite different: the complete removal of the
idea of the glory of God as the religious end of the State, the
idea of the sole sovereignty of God, of the theoretical inequality
of individuals, and their obedient adjustment to things as they
are. Here in Locke’s theory the dominating idea is rather one
of the most versatile individualistic rationalism, purely utilitarian
and secular in character, which can be abstracted as it stands
from the religious setting of Locke’s theory ; at a later date this
often actually took place. This rationalism rests upon such an
independent basis, both in philosophy and in public law, and
corresponds so closely to the secular idea of progress, and to the
political necessities of the day, that its inclusion in the religious
framework no longer had much inward significance. It stands
PROTESTANTISM
639
alongside this framework, not within it, just as the religious
associations exist alongside of the State. That, however, is the
spirit of the Enlightenment and not the spirit of Calvinism.
Thus in the Revolution of 1688 the establishment of the
constitutional Kingdom of William III expressed far less of the
Calvinistic idea of the mutua obligatio than the execution of
Charles I had been an expression of the Calvinistic doctrine that
the magistrats infirieurs have the right to mete out punishment
to a tyrant. Still, there were plenty of people ready to justify
the second Revolution on religious grounds of that kind. But the
Revolution itself was essentially far more secular than the revolt
against Charles I. 875
Hobbes
The third main founder of the modern conception of Natural
Law, Thomas Hobbes, was much farther from Calvinism than
Hugo Grotius and Locke. It is true that he also used the con-
ceptual material of the Christian Natural Law, and even main-
tained that in an ideal instance Divine and Natural Law and
Order might actually coincide, not in fancy, but in fact. Only,
Hobbes did not merely conceive the Natural Law of Society
in an anti-idealistic manner, as based on pure egoism alone,
but, above all, he regarded the essence of the social process
which arises out of this egoism as the establishment of an autho-
rity which, according to its conception, must be directly sovereign,
and therefore must include power over religion and the Church.
It is the induction of a purely absolutist theory from rationalistic
premises, which in many respects reminds us of some of the
Lutheran propositions.
PuFENDORF
Thus Pufendorf, who was a Lutheran, combined in a peculiar
way the doctrine of Grotius with that of Hobbes, and also held that
the authority of the Church is delegated to the Government. In
a doctrine of this kind there is no trace of the spirit of Calvinism.
Lutherans and Anglicans alone understood how to gather grapes
378 Cf. the Letters on Toleration of 1683, and the Two Treatises of Government of
1690 ; also Leztus: Der Toleranzbegriff, etc., and the very instructive work of
Bastide , which describes the whole period, J. L .: Ses Theories pol itiques et leur
influence en Angleterre, igo6 ; the views which are here expressed on matters and
theories ecclesiastical are, however, often very misleading, see especially
chapters v and'vi. — There is an analysis of Hooker in Lang: Ref u. Naturrecht ,
PP' 28-33 > bis originality, however, is here highly overestimated.
640 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
from the thorns of Hobbism ; but it was the Enlightenment which
reaped the chief harvest . 379
It would, therefore, be an error to attribute modern French
democracy, or even American democracy, directly to the influence
of Calvinism. Not even its theories of Natural Law were essentially
Calvinistic in origin. Rather, in their essence, they arose out of
purely economic movements, and their theories grew up out of
the common central stock on which both Christian and Humanist
Natural Law was nourished, the culture of the Ancient World.
So much, however, is true: to a remarkable extent Calvinism,
more than Catholicism, and far more than Lutheranism, had
prepared the way for the gradual emancipation of those theories
from their connection with Christian thought, even though the
Baptist movement was more radically effective in this direction,
as we shall see when we come to the English Revolution. It would
be truer to say that both these movements (the Calvinistic
and Baptist movements) have prepared the way for modern
democracy, and given it a spiritual backbone, rather than that
they actually created it. Even this preparatory process developed
against the actual intention of Calvinism. But even though this
needs to be strongly emphasized, on the other hand it is evident
that Calvinism, by means of the constitutional and critical
Natural Law principle which it adopted in the Genevan situation,
certainly had a facility for adapting itself to democracy, and that,
finally, in its religious ideas, not only was there no hindrance
at all, but they helped to create an affinity with it. However little
the American lack of respect for authority accords with Calvin’s
spirit, and, moreover, however alien to it Rousseau’s social and
political rationalism may be, Calvinism can still combine with
both inwardly, if the sovereignty of the religious sphere of life
is preserved.
Thus Calvinism has become that form of Christianity which
has an inward affinity with the modern democratic movement,
and can enter into contact with it without injuring its religious
ideas. At the same time, by the very fact of its fundamentally
religious and metaphysical individualism, by its retention of the
idea of the essential inequality in human life, and by its con-
servative feeling for law and order, it has escaped the most
878 Cf. Lezius and above, 537; for the whole subject, see my article Moralisten,
Englische in PRE*, and my article Das Stoisch-christliche Naturrecht und das modem t
profane Naturrecht in H£, igu , also in Verhandlungen des ersten deutschen Soziolo -
gentages , 1911, in which the instructive speeches made in the discussions are
also to be found.
PROTESTANTISM
641
dangerous results of democracy : mere majority rule and abstract
equality. To what extent it may have itself contributed to this
process of democratization it is very difficult to say in particular ;
some developments which have strengthened it in this direction
will be dealt with later on. It cannot, however, be denied that
to-day Calvinism is inwardly united with democracy, and that
its characteristic world outlook is based upon it. At the same
time it has also everywhere come to terms with the sects, which,
from the outset established more upon a democratic and in-
dividualistic basis, to-day, along with Calvinism, represent the
idea of an essential inward connection between democracy and
Christianity. This last point will be treated more fully in the
last section. In all that, however, Calvinism still remains the
supreme spiritual force . 380
Economic Ethic of Calvinism
The second important point is the economic ethic of Calvinism.
Its beginnings were insignificant, but it developed into a factor
of the greatest historical importance, both in the development
of the modern economic spirit and in that of Calvinism itself . 381
From the outset, in its main features the economic ethic
of Calvinism was also related to the corresponding aspects of
Lutheranism. The Calvinistic ethic shared the Lutheran view
about work, to which it assigned a high value, regarding it as
the practical exercise of a calling appointed by God, and there-
fore as Divine worship ; it also regarded it as a method of self-
discipline and of diverting evil desires. Both Calvin and Luther
advocated labour as a universal duty, and abolished monasticism
ancl mendicancy. The Calvinistic economic ethic also agreed
with the Lutheran ethic in its “anti-Mammon” spirit, its urgent
desire for modesty and moderation, its observance of distinctions
in rank, its campaign against luxury, which in this respect was
prosecuted with unexampled severity by laws against luxury, and
which was supported ecclesiastically by the moral tribunal.
Calvin also believed that poverty fostered the Christian virtues
more effectively than wealth, and he launched out into violent
denunciations of the great commercial cities like Venice and
Antwerp . 382 In spite of all this, however, Calvin influenced the
810 This is all brilliantly worked out in the manifesto by Kuyper , which is often
quoted. The restraining elements due to the religious tradition which English
Liberalism contained stand out very clearly in Held: Z we 1 Bucher, etc. — For its
influence upon Anglicanism, and its analogy with the sects, which to-day seek
refuge within its camp, cf. Kuyper, pp. 8-10; Karl Hartmann is here also very
instructive, see especially pp. 27-30 and 32. 381 See p. 91 1 . 383 See p. 91 1 .
VOL. II. N
64* THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
“Reformed” economic ethic from the very beginning in such a
way that, as in the political sphere, it developed an utterly
different spirit from that which animated the Lutheran ethic,
both in its primitive and in its present form. This took place,
however, without any special and conscious intention on Calvin’s
part. To a very large extent indeed, the direction in which this
ethic evolved was determined by the conditions which governed
the practical situation in Geneva.
This was the decisive turning-point: Calvin was convinced
that this “anti-Mammon” Christian spirit could express itself
and maintain its existence within the sphere of a society which
was based essentially upon a money economy, upon trade and
industry. Unlike Lutheranism in similar circumstances, ^Calvin
did not hark back to the agrarian patriarchal form of life as the
ideal with its closely knit self-contained family life, based as far
as possible on primitive methods of production, but he recog-
nized industrial production based on a money economy as the
natural foundation and form of professional work alongside of
agrarian labour. Calvin himself had a great deal to do with
questions of industrial production, and he quite approved of the
fact that greater profits were made in trade than in agriculture,
since they were simply the reward of carefulness and industry.
It is, of course, true that he urged the abolition of certain kinds
of business which were questionable from the Christian point
of view, such as the manufacture of playing-cards, but in
general he was in favour of movement and progress. It was at
Calvin’s instigation that, with the aid of a State loan, the manu-
facture of cloth and velvet was introduced into Geneva a& a
home industry, in order to give work to the poor and unemployed.
Later on, when this industry had to be given up on account of
the competition of Lyons, the manufacture of watches was in-
troduced with the same aim. He had no desire merely to uphold
existing customs and methods of gaining a livelihood. He never
denied the necessity for the mobility of an economic system based
on industry and trade. All this, however, was due to the Genevan
situation and the Genevan atmosphere, which even affected his
correspondence; his letters, indeed, deal constantly with the
interests of finance, trade, and industry (from the point of view
of the manual labourer ). 888
** 8 Cf. the following quotation from the letter, De Usuris , CR XXXVIII, p. 247 :
“Quid si igitur ex negociatione plus lucri percipi possit quam ex fundi cujusvis
proventu? — Unde vero mercatoris lucrum? Ex ipsius, inquies, diligentia et
industrial*
PROTESTANTISM 643
As a jurist and a townsman, from the beginning he may have
felt differently about these things than Luther who was a monk,
but from the sources it is plain that, in any case, in Geneva he
could not think or feel otherwise, if he were to have a practical
influence, and that he accepted this necessity without scruple or
difficulty . 884 The reason why Calvin was able to accept this
situation as he did was probably due to the peculiar character
of his practical active ethic, which embraced the whole sphere
of public life, and which set in the forefront those elements of
behaviour which were practically possible to achieve, while the
radical commandments about love and suffering were relegated
to the background. If Luther had lived in Geneva under the
same conditions we can hardly imagine that he would have
thought and felt otherwise than in Wittenberg. If Geneva had
been a specially large and active commercial town 385 it is of
course probable that even Calvin would have felt it much more
difficult to submit to the claims of Capitalism. In Geneva, how-
ever, which was surrounded by hostile and rival neighbours, and
whose territory was very small, the conditions were narrow and
provincial. But it was precisely in this form that Calvin found
Capitalism acceptable, as a calling which suited the existing
conditions in the city, and which was capable of being combined
with loyalty, seriousness, honesty, thrift, and consideration for
one’s neighbour. It was just because the economic conditions at
Geneva were so bourgeois, and on such a small scale, that Capi-
talism was able to steal into the Calvinistic ethic, while it was
rejected by the Catholic and the Lutheran ethic.
hat is officially expressed, properly speaking, in the important
fact that Calvin and the Calvinistic ethic rejected the canonical
veto on usury and the scholastic theory of money, and on the
contrary supported a doctrine of money, credit, and usury which
were nearer to the modern economic idea, with limitations,
certainly, with which we shall have to deal presently. In this
Calvin abandoned the purely consumer’s standpoint of the pre-
vious Christian ethic, and recognized the productive power of
money and of credit. Calvin’s co-operation with the economic
administration of the State, and his conception of the importance
of a social life which was well ordered from the economic point
of view, for the holy community, show that he felt an inner con-
nection between economic progress and moral elevation. Calvin’s
successors at Geneva went forward in the path which he had
traced. Beza and the VenirabU Compagnie devoted much detailed
#8< See p. 912. 886 On this point cf. Holl: Calvinreden , pp. 61 ff.
644 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
care and thought to questions of economic prosperity and effi-
ciency. They also watched to see that wealth was rightly distri-
buted, and that proper relief was given to the poor, and work
to the unemployed. In questions of this kind the Government of
the State continually turned to them for their opinions and advice.
They took an interest in taxation and in State loans, and in the
rate of interest, which was always fixed with their approval.
They gave their judgment in favour of the erection of a State
Bank, both in order to bring to the State the gain of exchange
of business and to create cheap credit for the trades which were
needing assistance . 386
Calvinism and Capitalism
Thus this economic practice of Geneva became the starting-
point from which Capitalism was incorporated into the Calvinistic
ethic all over the world, though with caution and under certain
limitations. Conditions among the French Huguenots, in the
Netherlands, and in England, each with their own characteristics,
also helped to adjust modern business life to the religious point
of view. One very important aspect of the situation is the fact
that the Calvinists in France and England, and at the outset
also in the Netherlands, and, above all, during their period of
exile on the Lower Rhine, as minorities were forced out of public
life and official positions in the State; they were thus obliged,
in the main, to go into business life. Apart from this, however,
the Calvinists displayed a strong tendency in this direction, even in
circumstances which were not particularly favourable to business
life; their industrious habits, their detachment from the world,
and their rational and utilitarian spirit certainly strengthened
this tendency . 387
The economic situation in Geneva, however, contained the
germ of logical developments which went beyond the intention
of Calvin and the Genevese. Once Capitalism had been accepted,
even with many precautions, given the right milieu, everywhere
it led to results which increased its power ; while the specifically
Calvinistic habits of piety and industry justified its existence and
helped to increase its strength, which gave it in the Calvinistic
communities a special character and a peculiar intensity . 388 The
exhortation to continual industry in labour, combined with the
limitation of consumption and of luxury, produced a tendency
to pile up capital, which for its part — in the necessity of its
888 Numerous examples in Choisy : Vitat chritien ; banks established, pp. 36 ff*
and 187 ff. 887 See p. 912. 888 See p. 915.
PROTESTANTISM
645
further utilization in work and not in enjoyment — necessitated
an ever-increasing turnover. The duty of labour, coupled with
the ban on luxury, worked out “economically as the impulse to
save”, and the impulse to save had the effect of building up
capital. To what extent these developments took place every-
where is a separate question. Upon the whole, however, this
result belonged to the very nature of the case, and it is the general
opinion that this is what actually took place among the most
important Calvinistic peoples . 389
This, however, is not the main point at issue. The contribution
of Calvinism to the formation of the Capitalist system itself is
not the most important aspect of the question. This only becomes
clear when, with Weber and Sombart, we inquire into the
ethical “spirit” and the world outlook, or the “economic temper”
which gave the system its firm hold over the minds of men, and
which, in spite of its opposition to natural human instincts, has
been able to strike root in human minds as a firm conviction.
Economic traditionalism, interrupted by unscrupulous indivi-
duals who are simply out for gain, is much more in line with
ordinary human instincts than the concrete and abstract dominion
of labour and profit, as ends in themselves, the continual increase
of work produced by every fresh profit from labour . 3893 It is here
that we perceive the importance (together with the related, yet
different, effects of Judaism) which the peculiar Calvinistic type
of the inward ethical attitude has gained towards the performance
of labour in business life, and its religious estimate of the earning
of money. The Protestant ethic of the “calling”, with its Cal-
viqistic assimilation of the Capitalist system, with its severity and
its control of the labour rendered as a sign of the assurance of
election, made service in one’s “calling”, the systematic exercise
of one’s energies, into a service both necessary in itself and
appointed by God, in which profit is regarded as the sign of
the Divine approval . 390 This conception of the “calling” and
of labour, with its taboo on idleness of every kind, with its
utilization of every chance of gain, and its confidence in the
blessing of God, now, however, to a great extent approached
the commercial professions and the business of making money.
It laid the foundation of a world of specialized labour, which
taught men to work for work’s sake, and in so doing it produced
our present-day bourgeois way of life, the fundamental psycho-
logical principles which gave it birth, which, however, it was
889 Cf. Weber: Antikritisches , XXX, rgiff.; Schlusswort, XXXI, 594 ff-
8888 See p.916. 880 See p.916.
646 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
not bound to perpetuate once this way of life had become the
constitution of the modern world.
Thus there arose a current— definite, particularly powerful,
and influential— of the bourgeois capitalistic spirit, which was
pre-eminently typical of the bourgeois way of life in general.
This was the predominance of labour and of the “calling”, of
industry for its own sake, a process of objectifying work and the
results of work, which was only possible where work was exalted by
means of an ascetic vocational ethic of that kind, into the sphere
of that which is necessary in itself by means of the underlying reli-
gious conception. Calvinism, which in its early days included a
good many groups of the aristocracy, was at first indifferent to
social questions, but in the course of the political development in
various countries it became bourgeois ; this social transformation,
however, was entirely in line with certain elements in its spirit. 891
It is obvious that such a conception of Capitalism would easily
glide into a purely secular conception, once the religious motives
had weakened and the religious atmosphere had begun to
evaporate. From the time of Adam Smith, indeed, the classical
economic theory has constructed the foundations of economics
in precisely the opposite sense, in pure hedonism. Here, however,
the opposition to the religious ethic was not due to its Utili-
tarianism. In secular matters, and especially in economics,
Utilitarianism was already the exclusive economic principle.
In this respect English economic science only continued the
fundamental religious convictions. The modern and anti-Calvinist
elements only appear in radical individualism, in the intro-
duction of the idea of equality, and in the abolition of respect
for authority, class privilege, and the welfare of the whole. Just
as in the case of the formation of the political theories, therefore,
the groups of theorists divide into two sections : those who are
rather conservative and those who are radically individualistic.
Adam Smith himself, like Locke, was still torn in both directions. It
was only the arrival of Bentham and his school which finally broke
the thread which united the new economic ethic with the old. 391a
3,1 On this point, and on the relation between mediaeval Capitalism and the
Catholic ethic, as also on the other kinds of Capitalism which are neither
ascetic nor bourgeois in tendency, see Weber , XXX , pp. 193-197*
3,la Cf. Held, pp. 144-342 ; p . 249 on Bentham : “However little the doctrine
was new in itself, its one-sided application in England by Bentham was some-
thing new: it signified Rationalism pure and simple, and a complete break
with the Puritan traditions of the English democracy.” Here also it is of French
origin as Held emphasizes. For the conservative ethical elements in Smith,
see Held, pp. 154-175.
PROTESTANTISM
647
The Manchester School, with its doctrinaire optimism, the
brutal glorification of competition as the survival of the fittest
in the struggle for existence, and finally the thoughtlessness with
which to-day capitalistic civilization accepts as its destiny its
feverish labour, its crises, its specialization, and its vocational
humanism — all this means a completely altered world. All this,
however, belongs to the history of economics, and not to that
of Calvinism. In connection with the sects there will be a good
deal more to say on this subject later on.
The significant point which is important even to-day for our
subject is this : that in these Christian circles, and in them alone,
was it possible to combine modern economic activity with
Christian thought, and, indeed, that down to the present day it
is possible to do this with a clear conscience. In this connection
we only need to recall the circumlocutions with which Catholicism
tries to make this modern form of economic life tolerable, and
how, at bottom, it continually attempts to restrain it, or the
revulsion with which early Lutheranism and contemporary
German Conservatism officially regard Capitalism. Seen in this
light, the significance of this new Calvinistic form of Christianity
for the whole modern development, and especially for the position
of Protestantism within it, becomes plain. It is the only form of
Christian social doctrine which accepts the basis of the modern
economic situation without reserve. The reason for this does not
lie in any supposed “greater insight” into the essence of the
economic processes, but in the fact that here the super-idealistic
and Pietistic hindrances in the fundamental ethical idea have
fallen away, which would have otherwise hindered or restrained
this development; because, on the contrary, the Calvinistic
ethic contains energies which directly further this economic
development . 392
Whether a Christian ethic of this kind, contrasted with that
of Catholicism and of Lutheranism, is entirely an advantage,
whether it is not tinged rather strongly with the spirit of “busi-
ness” and the avidity of a materialistic outlook on life, is another
question. The main point is that it is peculiar to the leading
modern nations, or at least to majority groups amongst them,
and that it here effects an adjustment to the modern economic
world which has not been achieved by the Christian piety of
other nations.
The Christian element in this Calvinistic justification of Capi-
talism would, however, be greatly misunderstood if one did not
392 See p. 917.
648 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
at the same time remember the limits with which the real
Christian idea of love here also surrounds the ethic of industry,
and which have continued to exert a beneficent influence right
down to the present day, wherever, in all capitalistic labour, the
main Calvinistic ideas have remained vitally alive. Labour is
asceticism, an asceticism which is absolutely necessary. Profit is
the sign of the blessing of God on the faithful exercise of one’s
calling. But labour and profit were never intended for purely
personal interest. The capitalist is always a steward of the gifts
of God, whose duty it is to increase his capital and utilize it for
the good of Society as a whole, retaining for himself only that
amount which is necessary to provide for his own needs. All
surplus wealth should be used for works of public utility, and
especially for purposes of ecclesiastical philanthropy. Thus the
Genevese assessed themselves to the furthest possible limit for
special cases of need, and gave regularly in support of the local
poor as well as for the numerous refugees. The charitable activity
of the Church which was exercised by the board of deacons was
part of the requirement of the Church-order instituted by God,
was organized with great energy, and, with the aid of voluntary
gifts which were often amazingly large, it was able to cope with
the demands made upon it. This is the origin of the practice
known among us through the example of American millionaires
— in which even men who have become quite indifferent to
religion will give a large portion of their profits for public pur-
poses. The actual theory and practice of money and interest has
also been determined by this spirit of philanthropy.
Only “productive credit 55 for business purposes is allowed, not
“usury credit 55 , which is simply used for living on interest. From
poor men, or people who have been otherwise harassed by mis-
fortune, no interest is to be taken; loans also were not to be
refused for lack of securities. Arrangements of that kind are only
to be carried out with reference to the good of the community
as a whole. The debtor ought to gain just as much from the
money as the creditor. The law of cheapness ought to prevail
everywhere, in accordance with the principle of the Gospel and
of the Natural Law, that “whatsoever ye would that they should
do unto you, do ye also unto them 55 . Finally, the rate of interest
ought not to exceed a maximum, which is to be legally fixed
according to the needs of the situation. This was the theory. In
Geneva practical life was regulated in accordance with these
principles. The fight against usury and the exploitation of the
poor fill the protocols of the Council and of the Consistory, and
PROTESTANTISM
649
these Christian-Social elements of Calvinistic doctrine have also
left their mark upon ethics. Thus we can understand how it is
that within Calvinism, in the face of the modern development
of Capitalism, there has always been, and still is, a tendency to
merge into a form of Christian Socialism. We have already seen
that a Socialism of this kind was contained, from the very outset,
in the Genevan ideal of the Holy Community. It was continued
in the “communities under the Cross”, where the religious idea
developed freely. How far it helped to determine the State
legislation of Calvinistic countries has still to be discovered.
The great English system of legislation which deals with the
poor, with workmen and with wages — in the guild-professional
sense and, above all, with respect to education for work — bore
traces of its spirit. In opposition to the “Manchester” conception
of the State and of economics, Carlyle deliberately asserted the
old Puritan ideas. The Christian Socialism of the English people
at the present day is essentially of Calvinistic origin, and the
activity of the American churches is often of a Christian Socialist
kind directed against the abuses of Capitalism. In Switzerland,
in the Netherlands, in England, and in America there are to-day
Socialist clergy, whereas within the sphere of Lutheranism such
a phenomenon is regarded as an offence against the sacred
foundation of the Divine order, as taking part in purely secular
matters, as a reprehensible revolutionary spirit, and a human
intervention in the order of Providence ; among us social heresies
are more dangerous and more objectionable than doctrinal here-
sies. The meaning of that is, however, that Calvinism is in closer
agreement with modern tendencies of social life than Lutheran-
isrn, or than Catholicism, which, at least in the Latin lands of
its origin, likewise holds these heresies at arm’s length. This also
is the basis of that intense self-consciousness of Calvinism, the
sense that it is the only form of Christianity adapted to modern
life, because, on the one hand, it is able to justify modern forms
of economic production before the tribunal of conscience, and
because, on the other hand, by means of Christian Socialism, it
strives to rectify the abuses of the system when they occur. It is
very conscious of representing “modern Christianity” — not be-
cause it is in touch with modern theological thought (for its
theological tendency inclines to conservatism, and it is only its
overwhelmingly practical character which leads to dogmatism
being relegated to a secondary position), but because it is in
harmony with the political and economic way of life, and under-
stands how to further and yet to define its problems, whereas
650 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
it considers that Lutheranism is philosophically diseased, un-
practical, and remote from the problems of ordinary life . 898
Calvinism and International Policy
Of less importance for later times, but all the more important
during the first century of its existence, was a third tendency,
by which Calvinism was influenced by the Genevan situation,
and then by later political and ecclesiastical developments. This
was the tendency to form a religious system of politics and of
international mutual support — that is, the policy of armed inter-
vention. Since the independence of Geneva was intrinsically
bound up with the fortunes of the Reformation, it could only
be permanently maintained by federation with the Protestant
Powers, the Reformed Cantons, and with their German co-
religionists, for its independence was menaced perpetually by
France, Savoy, and Berne . 894 Further, Calvin was often only able
to maintain his position in Geneva itself with the support of the
foreign churches, whose opinion and agreement he often solicited,
and which aided him in difficult and complicated situations.
To that we must add the missionary impulse, and the urge
towards universalism which has already been described, which
certainly at first based its confidence solely upon the Word and
the power of Truth. In practice, however, it soon found that
diplomatic and secular methods were absolutely necessary ; more-
over, in the school of Genevan politics these measures had forced
themselves upon the attention of the leaders as necessary for the
primary aim of self-preservation. In foreign policy also these
methods became necessary, and had to be recommended to other
churches. The diplomatic correspondence of Calvin, the activity
of Beza as a political agent, the Huguenot, Netherland, and
Palatinate negotiations, are all well-known expressions of this
necessity. In theory this practical necessity was reflected in the
doctrine of the union of all Protestant churches and their duty
of mutual support, which of course implies the same obligations
for the States and commonwealths which were united with
them . 395 Certainly at first the only immediate result was the
necessity for financial, personal, and theological support, and for
diplomatic assistance . 396 But immediately the further question
#M See p.918. 994 See p.919.
991 Cf. Brief e, 131; which deals with the question of international mutual
support; similarly 7, 157. On Calvin’s international spirit, see Richer, p . 184.
m Calvin’s letters give very many illustrations of this point ; it is his ideal to
strengthen a position of power through diplomacy, but apart from bloodshed,
as he says with reference to Condi: Brief e, II, 334.
PROTESTANTISM
651
arose : to what extent may and should this help take a military
form? I.e. how far are Wars of Religion both permitted and
enjoined as the ultimate method of decision? The important
decision in favour of Wars of Religion — so fundamentally different
from the Lutheran position — was not in harmony with Calvin’s
mind and spirit. His views on war in general were exactly the
same as those of Luther . 897 War, he held, is a matter which con-
cerns the State, which is permitted to use it for the secular pur-
poses of defence, provided that it is waged with no confidence
in the arm of the flesh and with trust in God, in all humility
and Christian austerity of morals. The interests of religion, on
the other hand, must be promoted without the power of the
sword, purely in dependence upon Providence, through suffering
and endurance ; they are not to be mingled with secular methods
of exercising power. The constant recourse to diplomacy, how-
ever, was already, in effect, a use of secular methods, and it was
in the very nature of the case that on occasion this diplomacy
had to take the ultimate step of armed intervention. Just as
Calvin’s teaching on the duty of subjects to obey the Government
was broken down by his other tenet: that the lower magistrates
were entitled, on occasion, to exercise the “right of resistance”,
and take up the reins of government, so also his teaching about
peaceful intervention became ultimately, on occasion, one which
admitted the right of armed intervention. Of course, a legal reason
had always to be found for this step, just as for the “right of
resistance”. This was discovered as soon as the ruling power had
become a “tyrant”, and the lower magistrates had taken his
place; they were then also empowered to form alliances with
foreign Powers. Thus the doctrine of the expansion and main-
tenance of the dominion of Christ by purely spiritual means
became merged with the recognition of the right of armed inter-
vention and of Wars of Religion, so long as, in so doing, the legal
order was preserved . 398 This led to the right and the duty of
military support in general; thus that which had been forced
upon Calvinism in actual case of need was then justified in theory.
In accordance with this Beza thoroughly investigated the whole
subject of “Wars of Religion” and of armed intervention, as well
as of the “right of resistance”, and he based his affirmative reply
upon the Bible, upon History, and upon Dogma. From that time
forward both questions were closely connected in the literature
of the earlier opponents of monarchy . 399
It is well known that this view attained immense practical
397 See p. 919. gee p. 920. 899 See p. 920.
652 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
importance, and that the example of Calvinism finally also
affected the Lutherans in the Thirty Years War, who, on the
occasion of the War of Schmalkalden, had indeed already dis-
cussed the same problem. When the period of the Wars of Religion
was over, in which Cromwell had given a last example of Protestant
policy, this doctrine then became meaningless, but as a relic of
those times there has still remained, right down to the present
day, a strong sense of the close connection of all Calvinists with
each other, an international Calvinism, with which the very
individualistic Lutheranism of the present day, in spite of its
Lutheran Conferences, cannot in any way compare.
International Calvinism, after it had given up the theory which
justified “Wars of Religion”, and the gradual severance of its
connection with the State — while it became more and more
democratic and capitalistic — went over to the pacifist position in
this problem of war, which is so difficult for the Christian ethic.
A war, like the Boer War, for example, may possibly be justified
for reasons of national self-preservation, but Christian nations
in general ought not to bring other nations to such a pass that
they feel obliged to wage a war of that kind.
The humanitarian and ethical movement against war, which
aims at substituting a system of covenants and courts of arbi-
tration in place of war, is pre-eminently at home among Cal-
vinists and the sects ; they take the whole question very seriously,
and struggle hard against the Imperialistic tendencies, which are
indeed closely connected with the process of economic develop-
ment of the nations to which they belong . 400
Social Philosophy of Calvinism
Summing up the results of these inquiries, we then begin to
understand the social doctrines which are peculiar to Calvinism,
and their development beyond their early position, which at the
beginning seemed so much like that of Luther. These social
doctrines are a product of the particular religious and ethical
peculiarities of Calvinism, which revealed a marked individuality
in the doctrine of Predestination, in the voluntary principle, in
the tendency towards organization, in activity, and in the idea
of a “holy community”, and also in its ethic, which aimed at
achieving that which was possible and practical. On the other
hand, however, they are a product of the republican tendency
in politics, the capitalist tendency in economics, the diplomatic
and militarist tendencies in international affairs; all these ten-
400 See p. 921.
PROTESTANTISM
653
dencies at first radiated from Geneva in a very limited way;
then, however, they united with similar elements within the
Calvinistic religion and ethic, and in this union they became
stronger and stronger; until in connection with the political,
social, and ecclesiastical history of particular countries, they
received that particular character of the religious morality of
the middle classes (or bourgeois world) which is so different from
the early Calvinism of Geneva and of France. The results of this
development were gathered up by the natural-philosophical and
theological ethic, which, quite unlike Lutheranism, was highly
developed in Calvinism, and which made steady progress from
Galvin to Jurieu and Lampe . 401 The social doctrines of Calvinism
have already been described sufficiently fully in the preceding
pages. The fundamental sociological theory of Calvinism, its
doctrine of the State and of economics, have emerged clearly
from this analysis, and there is no need to sum them up again.
The only point in which a summary of this kind would be useful
is the conception of the Church. In Calvinism the Church is
both national and free, a holy community, and an objective
institution, a voluntary and a compulsory organization, since it
is based upon the assumption that all the elect, if they are
sufficiently well taught, will open their minds to the Truth,
while it is required that all the non-elect must be suppressed,
to the glory of God and for the protection of the elect, and must
be prevented from expressing both their unbelief and their non-
morality in public. Thus this is the union of the sect and the
Church ideal, minus a Royal Head of the Church and patronage.
The Church consists of the whole body of the elect, but that
cloes not mean that its main idea is democratic, for the con-
gregation is only allowed to give its silent consent to the decisions
of the Church leaders, and the right to protest is only permitted
in extreme cases. The Church government is in the hands of
the official office-bearers, who are placed in office according to
the Divine Church-order: i.e. the ministers; the courts of dis-
cipline, the teachers and deacons, who are systematically ap-
pointed apart from the tumult of the popular vote, and who do
not represent the Church but the Word of God. The classical
constitution and the system of synods made this Genevan idea
suited to the conditions among great nations, but it did not alter
its spirit.
In questions of faith and morals the Bible constitutes the final
court of appeal. Throughout it is assumed that its meaning is
401 Sec p. 921,
654 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
plain and clear; when uncertainty arises the meaning may be
settled by reference to some of the most highly respected con-
gregations, whose opinion would give added weight to any
decision. This Church showed its independent position in the
following ways : by its independent exercise of moral judgment ;
by a widespread, system of supervision and denunciation of
individuals ; by its authority to exclude members from the sacra-
ments, which meant a civil boycott as well; and by its respect
for, and its occasional influence upon, the municipal legislation.
In addition, however, the Genevan Church also counted upon
the voluntary support and co-operation of the civil authorities,
who also took the Bible as their standard. In practice, however,
there was continual friction between the Church and the civil
authority on the question of excommunication. Thus in spite of
the supposed unity of the Corpus Christianum Calvinism found it
impossible to avoid friction with the State. There was conflict
everywhere, not only in Geneva. In England and in the Nether-
lands this friction led to serious conflict and vast catastrophes,
the effects of which we still have to consider . 402
The Calvinist doctrine of Society has already been described
sufficiently in the preceding pages. In Geneva it bore a quite
overwhelmingly bourgeois-industrial and financial character. We
have yet to discover how it worked out in the rural regions in-
fluenced by Calvinism, where the peasants were under the con-
trol of the landed nobility. In any case, the general idea of Society
was overwhelmingly bourgeois, and became so more and more.
Calvinism was even accused of hatred of the aristocracy. This
is enough to account for the class and guild organizations
of the day, although unlike Lutheranism the question of
stability is practically ignored; indeed, the frequent changes
of work, and the vicissitudes of fortune in the refugee com-
munities in general, made stability impossible. Characteristically
there is no trace of the crude Lutheran doctrine of the three
classes.
Wherever class distinctions do appear, as in the legislation
against luxury, we see that the social organization was varied;
social distinctions, however, depend entirely upon a man’s pos-
sessions. Possibly certain plutocratic characteristics which are
still visible in the life of Holland and America may be connected
with this fact. Above all, however, the idea of equality in the
sight of God is emphasized far more strongly here than in
Lutheranism, and in Church-life, especially in the exercise of
401 Sec p. 921.
PROTESTANTISM 655
discipline, it was carried out far more explicitly. In Geneva
violent conflicts raged round this question. We all remember
how John Knox explained to Mary Stuart how all men, even
kings, are equal before the Law of God. The Board of Discipline
did not hesitate to deal with the Huguenot nobility. In spite
of the retention of external differences, and of the strict loyalty
which tjiis involved, this idea of the equality of all men in the
sight of God undoubtedly caused a ferment of democratic ideas.
Kuyper has rightly pointed this out in his manifesto of modern
Calvinism ; this tendency was, however, modified by the charac-
teristically patriarchal elements within Calvinism. From the very
beginning it was a social ideal which combined democratic and
aristocratic elements, which also exercised a restraining influence
upon each other. This social ideal attained an exalted spirit of
independence from earthly authority, by the way it subordinated
all classes of Society to the sovereignty of God ; at the same time,
however, it gained unity and stability through the conception
of law, and through the definition of its sole aim as the glory
of God. This fact explains the passionate and often successful
attacks made by united Calvinistic minorities upon a whole
nation, such as those which appear again and again in French,
Dutch, and English history . 403
So far as the ethic of sex and of the Family is concerned,
Calvinism has the same principles as Lutheranism. Possibly,
however, we may say that the personality of woman is granted
a higher degree of independence, and that the purpose of mar-
riage is conceived in a more rational way ; the scholastic dualistic
id^a of its relative value, and its necessity for the restraint of
concupiscence, has given place to the rational idea that the
Family is a means of building up Society. Here also we have
a glimpse of the difference between Lutheran and Calvinistic
asceticism. Under the influence of its doctrine of Original Sin
Lutheranism abandons concupiscence entirely to sin, but permits
the element of sinful impulse to exist within the restrictions of
marriage, whereas Calvinism lays less emphasis on that element,
urging rather that marriage should be strictly regulated by the
rational view of its service to the common good, while the natural
instincts and passions are to be controlled by objective con-
siderations and the attempt to direct them into other channels.
This is merely a difference of emphasis, but it is important, and
it throws light on the inmost distinctions 404 between the two
systems.
408 See p. 922.
404 See p. 922.
656 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Influence of later Calvinism
In the main, in this section we have been concerned almost
exclusively with primitive Calvinism, and only some of the
characteristics which have affected its modern development have
been mentioned. This, however, does not provide an adequate
explanation of Calvinism as it is to-day, nor of those great de-
velopments of the seventeenth century, which produced move-
ments which have profoundly affected the life of the present day.
Two important phenomena, both of which were the direct pro-
duct of Calvinism, have not yet been mentioned : the rise of the
Free Churches, and the rise of Puritanism within the Church, or
Pietism.
(I) Rise of the Free Churches
Through the development of the Free Churches, Calvinism
forged a bond of union with democracy, which was totally
different from the ethic of the State which has already been
described. This earlier ethic of the State was only concerned
with establishing a constitution or a system of control over against
a State which was doing injury either to the glory of God or to
the welfare of nations; otherwise its ideas were as conservative
and legitimist as possible. The essential meaning of the Free
Church system, on the contrary, is the destruction of the mediaeval
and early Protestant idea of a social order welded together by
one uniform State Church, and of one infallible authority with
a uniform control of the whole of civilization. From the very
\ outset, therefore, its attitude towards the fundamental social id$as
of the previous era was revolutionary. As a system, therefore, it
represented a subjective and relative form of religion, which
indeed only meant the renunciation of that earthly authority
which possesses and promotes the extension of absolute Truth;
for this very reason, however, it felt obliged to permit the dif-
ferent religious communions to exist alongside of one another,
since they appear to have some right to exist until the final
separation at the Return of Christ. This meant that the question
of Church membership now became a matter of individual choice,
and that, at least outwardly, the form of Church-order becomes
that of a voluntary association, even although theologically the
community which thus comes into being may still continue
to be considered as an objective, ecclesiastical institution. Thus
the conception of the Church was moving towards individualistic
democratic ideas, and it is obvious that an ecclesiastical ideal
PROTESTANTISM
657
of this kind would have a close affinity with political democracy;
on the other hand, also, a democracy which regards the State
as a unity of individuals can more easily co-operate with a
Church-conception of this kind than with the idea of a State
Church, which at bottom in some way always dominates the
State with its absolutist ideas. In course of time, therefore, the
Free Church system, or the separation of Church and State,
became the religious and political principle of democracy, while,
on the other hand, the Free Churches produced democratic
impulses. It is clear that this represents a new development of
Calvinism, and one which goes far beyond all its previous ex-
perience; above all, the Free Churches approximate more and
more to the sect-type, even when the idea of the Church is
preserved, with all its dogmatic and ethical consequences.
Finally, whereas the result of the development of the Free
Churches was a somewhat formal analogy with the sect-type,
the second development forms a very obvious analogy with the
sect-type, both in form and content. Pietism has no direct
concern with Church constitutions and democratic tendencies
or results; its one desire is to create a “pure” Church. Pietism
intensified the fundamental asceticism of Calvinism, and in so
doing it broke with the world and with secular culture, having
no use for anything which goes beyond all that is directly utili-
tarian and necessary. This certainly was a reactionary tendency,
compared with the much freer and finer attitude of Calvin him-
self, and also the earlier Calvinistic idea of civilization, which
was distinguished precisely by its urbane refinement and human-
istic culture ; naturally this idea did not cease to exist, but it was
forced into the background by the more active and more Puri-
tanical form of Calvinism. Pietism, therefore, developed some
affinities with the Ethos of the sect, although the very distinct
differences between it and the genuine Baptist Ethos still remained,
although they had been distinctly modified.
Both these movements, however — the Free Church system and
Pietistic Puritanism — were not by any means identical with each
other. The Free Church movement can be understood in the
sense of a dogmatic and ethical Calvinism of the most correct
kind, and can, if it will, decidedly assert or increase the freer
attitude towards the world. Pietism, on the other hand, does not
need to urge the necessity to break up the uniformity of the State
Church system, since it hopes, either, that it will succeed in
bringing the whole of Society under the yoke of Church discipline
and of the Puritan ideal, or that it will be able to form smaller
vol. n. o
658 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
grdups within the Church, which would virtually create a dis-
tinction between a religious community in the wider, more
pedagogic, and relative sense, and one which would be conceived
in the narrower, more Perfectionist, and absolute sense. At times,
however, both tendencies merge into one another. The motif of
the Free Church, in addition to its emphatic rejection of com-
pulsion in religious matters, can be also that of the “holy com-
munity”, and the Pietist system of creating small groups within
the Church can also lead to the development of a Free Church ;
instances of this kind actually happened, especially in the early
days.
The question now arises, To what extent are both these develop-
ments to be attributed to the logical development of Calvinism,
and to what extent has this result been affected by external
influences of a foreign kind? Both these changes took place pre-
eminently in the great conflicts in England, and in the Nether-
lands, between the State and the supremacy of the Church,
between the ideal of holiness and that of the Renaissance and
of national customs. Was this the logical result of Calvinism, or
was this situation created by influences of a special character?
First of all, we may say that both these developments, in spite
of great changes, can still be explained in the light of the Genevan
basis; it must be admitted, of course, that they were not the
direct result of the Genevan situation; on the contrary, they
arose out of a quite different setting. They took place in fact
in conditions in which the situation was no longer controlled by
the life of a small State, but by the problems which arise where
masses of people are concerned, which increasingly necessitated
strong compulsion in religious matters. Geneva was a small State,
and this made it possible for this comparatively limited number
of people to be permeated with the ideals of Christian holiness.
For a long time also its civil government was weak, and therefore
it submitted to the control of the Church. In both respects this
situation was unique, and unattainable under other conditions.
In other places too, however, where Calvinism was organized
on similar lines, it was always at first the religion of an aggressive
minority. Within a smaller setting it was possible to set up the
ideal of the “holy community” as a national Church, and a
Christian civilization which covered the whole of Society, while
the opposition of this minority to the civil authority meant in
practice that the problem of a State Church did not exist. But
as soon as it became a question of influencing the life of actual
sovereign States with the Calvinistic ideal of the State and of
PROTESTANTISM
659
Society, or as soon as the Calvinistic churches were placed
within a general system of secular mass civilization, the problem
then arose : How was the civil authority to adjust itself to the
predominating ecclesiastical and theological interests? This led
to the further question: How could a “holy community” com-
posed of sterling Christians, whose faith was a matter of profound
personal conviction, and whose lives were controlled by an
exalted and austere ideal, be at the same time a Church which
would provide a spiritual home for the masses of the population?
The pressure exercised by Calvinism provoked the resistance of
the political authority which demanded “Erastianism”, i.e. the
control of the Church by the State, and the resistance of the
civil authorities which had no desire to adapt themselves to
the hard and one-sided rigorism which Calvinism required from
its adherents.
The fact of this resistance, however, produced a great change
in Calvinism itself, by forcing it into a new position. Calvinism
had to face this question: Is this ideal of a “holy community”,
and of making God’s glory dominant in the whole life of the
world, actually practicable? Long before, the Anabaptists had
denied this possibility, but Calvin had asserted that it was pos-
sible (in resolute confidence that the non-elect were in the
minority, and that, at least outwardly, they could and must be
made to submit to the Christian Church). And now the question
had reappeared. And with this, too, it became quite evident that
the Calvinist ideal possessed a certain affinity with the Baptist
ideal, although at first no one had been aware of the fact. Like
th^ Baptists the Calvinists now began to question the validity
of the whole State Church system, and to replace it by a voluntary
Church which the State cannot touch. like the Baptists the
Calvinists undertook to separate themselves from the world by
a Puritanical strictness of life. It was only an approximation to
the Baptist ideal, however ; there was no real unity between the
two. Even as a Free Church Calvinism still remained as far as
possible a national Church, nor, in practice, has Puritanism ever
disputed on principle the existence of secular offices, power, war,
law, and the oath. There is, however, a certain resemblance
between the Calvinistic Free Church and the Baptist ideal, and
it is clear how deeply this is due to the problem raised by Cal-
vinism in general of the really active “holy community” which
represents the sovereignty of God . 406
Further, it is clear that, in any case, Puritanism and Pietism
408 See p. 922,
660 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
were able to proceed more directly out of the fundamental ideas
of the Calvinistic Church than the Free Church movement,
although the latter is the more enduring and important principle
in world-history. The Free Church movement has been described
as a “subsidiary ecclesiastical ideal” of Calvinism, produced
when the “primary” ideal proves insufficient or unsuccessful. On
the other hand, however, some thinkers look upon it as an aspect
of the Calvinistic idea of the Church connected with Natural
Law, which only thus finds its logical expression. Modern Cal-
vinists like Kuyper do not hesitate to ascribe the existence of
the Free Churches directly to the influence of Calvin’s most
essential ideas ; his idea of a State Church, with its compulsory
Christian civilization, they regard as a mediaeval idea, involving
mediaeval limitations, which it is easy to discard. Others trace
its origin to influences derived from the Baptist idea of the Church,
in which, indeed, adult Baptism is only a symptom, but not the
heart of the matter. The question of the origin of this development
is thus a very real problem . 406
When we remember that in primitive Calvinism there was not
the slightest tendency towards the formation of these “Free
Church” ideals, but that, on the contrary, it considered it the
greatest crime to tolerate the existence of several churches along-
side of each other, and a withdrawal of the State from the sphere
of its Christian duty; when too we realize that primitive Cal-
vinism believed that the absolute and unbroken nature of the
idea of truth requires both the unity of civilization and the sole
dominion of the Truth, coupled with intolerance towards un-
truth; when, further, we consider that the Calvinistic idea of
the Church from the very outset was certainly not democratic,
but that it carefully avoided the logical consequence of demo-
cratic ideas, and that, although the doctrine of Predestination
did permit an immense individualism of personality, it permitted
no “enthusiastic” emphasis on “direct” religious experience, with
very great variety of expression, but, rather, that by connecting
it with the means of grace in the Church, the Word, and the
Sacrament it extended its solemn sense of awe to all these means
of grace : we then feel that it is impossible to come to such con-
clusions.
To that we must add these further considerations : whenever,
in any particular instance, Calvinism was forced to take its place
alongside of other denominations, it always regarded this situation
as something which was only compulsory and temporary, and
404 See p. 924.
PROTESTANTISM 661
that where, in the beginning, it was forced into the position of
a Free Church, or a secret society, it regarded this explicitly
as a serious lack, that in England and North America, under
Presbyterian influence, as soon as it had the power to choose,
it gave up its principles of toleration and returned to the prin-
ciple of Theocracy ; that at the Synod of Charenton it directly
and solemnly condemned Independency and Congregationalism
in the French Church. The early Puritan communities in Eng-
land also, which at first had been Separatist, under more favour-
able circumstances became the great Presbyterian party, which
desired to replace the Anglican State Church by a Presbyterian
State Church. Even the communities on the Lower Rhine re-
garded their Free Church form of existence as merely provisional,
and aspired to become a State Church, after the pattern of that
which the Calvinists had attained in Holland. Even the idea of
a Church covenant is not Calvinistic in origin, for the Scottish
Covenants were not Church institutions but associations for the
protection of the Church . 407
The Brownists
In reality, the historical starting-point of the Free Churches,
as a normal principle, does not lie in those Free Churches which
were the fruit of necessity, but in Congregationalism. The origin
of Congregationalism was similar to that of Puritanism, but it
was not identical with it. Robert Browne, the Father of Con-
gregationalism, was at first a member of the strict Puritan body;
then, however, he developed Separatist principles which were
expressed in the idea of complete separation between Church
and State, in basing the life of the Church solely upon the
inward power of the Spirit, in a Scriptural austerity of worship,
in the demand for “converted” preachers, in the ideal of the
purity of the body of communicants, in the principle of self-
government in individual churches, and finally in the idea of a
covenant and the voluntary character of the Church.
In this ideal the only Puritan and Calvinist feature is the
emphasis upon the holy community. All the other characteristics
are Baptist, and in part akin to those of the spiritual reformers ;
the idea of the Church Covenant especially is decidedly Baptist.
It does not affect the argument that Browne himself, his spirit
broken by suffering, made his peace with the Established Church,
with mental reservations; further, his mental reservations were
of a “spiritual’ * nature, for Browne believed that the spirit was
407 See p. 924.
tt» THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
all that mattered, and that externals were insignificant. The
retention of Infant Baptism also, and the recognition of the
validity of Anglican Baptism, certainly shows that these “Holi-
ness” groups were not concerned with the question of Adult
Baptism at all. They were based upon a covenant with God and
with each other, and their constitution was simply that of purer
and more closely knit groups within the universal Church; they
did not intend to be new forms of Church organization. This
comes out clearly in the controversy with the General Baptists,
who, in common with Robinson’s Leyden Church, had arisen out
of a Brownist community at Gainsborough, but who, under the
influence of the Dutch Mennonites, had adopted the principle
of Adult Baptism. In doctrine, too, the Brownists remained com-
pletely orthodox in a Calvinistic sense . 408
The Barrowists
Henry Barrowe, the second “Father” of Congregationalism,
held opinions which were very similar to those of Robert Browne.
Barrowe was a gentleman and a layman who had been converted
to Puritanism; in his opinion a Separatist position was the only
logical inference to be drawn from Puritanism and the ideal of
a holy community. For this reason he opposed the Puritans of
the Cartwright school (whom he stigmatized as “illogical”) just
as bitterly as the High Church Party, which on its side thought
it was entitled to reproach Puritanism with the very existence
of the Brownists and the Barrowists, which, it was careful to point
out, had really been caused by the behaviour of the Puritans.
Along with many of his followers Barrowe died the death oi; a
martyr, a sacrifice to the cruel spirit of Elizabethan conformity,
which saw in these Separatist movements the principles of anarchy
at work, threatening the very existence of Church and State, and
of Society as a whole.
Barrowe evolved his ideal from the Bible and the Calvinistic
idea of holiness ; to some extent also he was indirectly influenced
by Brownism, and actually to a far greater extent by the Baptist
movement, though this he himself would not admit. Also, just
as in the case of Browne, he had been deeply influenced by books
dealing with interior religion, although he did not go so far as
to set the Inner Word above the Bible, as it was alleged was done
by some of those who laid most emphasis upon the “religion of
the Spirit”. His recognition of the function of lay preachers and
of spiritual gifts, which may have been deduced directly from
408 See p. 925.
PROTESTANTISM
663
the Bible, points in the same direction. His ideal of the Church
may be summarized thus : it is a “pure” Church, separate from
the State; each congregation is completely independent, con-
stituted upon the basis of a Church covenant; the sacraments
are merely the sign and seal of this covenant ; its officials— pastors,
elders, deacons — are called independently, in a purely democratic
way, yet without equality; it exercises Church discipline and
excommunication independently, supports itself and its officials
by the voluntary gifts of the faithful, and in all particulars it
upholds the ideal of early Christian love and holiness among all
its members. Synods of the whole Church will only act in an
advisory capacity; the individual congregation is to be entirely
independent; the Holy Spirit will preserve the spirit of unity.
In doctrine his point of view is strictly Calvinistic and Predcs-
tinarian. The only ecclesiastical function left to the State is the
expulsion of those who profess false doctrines; the building up
of the Church is to be left to its own efforts and to the Spirit,
in harmony with the principles of Scriptural Church-order.
Marriages and funerals are civil functions. The authority of the
State is to be treated with conservative respect, yet at the same
time excommunication can be exercised even against princes
without injury to their high civil position. Infant Baptism is
retained, and the baptism of false churches is also recognized,
since election and the influence of the Word are not bound by
the limits of the purely visible Church.
In spite of certain resemblances with the Baptist ideal of the
Church as a voluntary association and with the Baptist ideal of
holiness, there is in this last point a relic of the Calvinistic national
diurch ideal, in the light of which these “purely independent
communities ’ 5 appear merely as particular Perfectionist groups.
Thus in spite of much controversy the thread which con-
nects this movement with Puritanism has not been entirely
severed . 409
At this point two lines of possible development lay before
Congregationalism: on the one hand, a merely subjective de-
velopment in the direction of freedom of conscience, and the
formation of more spiritual exclusive groups, without any definite
ecclesiastical constitutional ideals, or, on the other, the organiza-
tion of independent individual congregations into a Church, based
on a covenant, in which each congregation is based upon the
voluntary principle. The English Independency of Cromwell’s
Army developed in the first direction. The Congregationalism
40t See p. 926.
664 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
which has maintained its existence down to the present day
followed the second line of development. But, whichever line it
took, Congregationalism stood midway between the Calvinistic
church-type and the sect-type ; to some extent this was involved
in the fact that Calvinism itself had many affinities with the sect-
type; in reality, however, Congregationalism only arose under
Anabaptist influence; above all, as we shall see later, it was
influenced by a type of spirituality which differed greatly from
Anabaptist ideals. The close connection between this movement
and the sect-type appears not only in the fact that the General
Baptists went over to the Anabaptists, but also in the fact of the
development of the Particular Baptists, which followed an entirely
independent course. These Particular Baptists likewise had split
off from originally Independent communities, and adopted Adult
Baptism as a result of the Free Church principle; otherwise,
however, they remained strict Calvinists, and had no further
connection with the Baptists. Frequently bodies of Congrega-
tionalists went over to the Baptists en bloc ; indeed, there were
some congregations which were composed of both elements. There
were also Baptist congregations which organized themselves on
the basis of a Church covenant, an explicit agreement of the
Church members with each other and with God, which each
member had to sign and solemnly swear to observe. That is an
entirely Baptist idea. On the other hand, however, Congrega-
tionalism was closely akin to the Calvinistic church-type. It is
shown in the different ways in which this fundamental Church
covenant is expressed; sometimes it is only implicit, and some-
times it is explicit. When it is only implicit it is supposed to be
contained in the covenant of Infant Baptism and in the existence
of the Calvinistic national Church ; it then only means the idea
of a Church which is under strict obligations to be a “holy
community”, and leaves to it its significance as a method of
popular education. When it is explicit it means the constitution
of a separate body upon a basis of voluntary membership and
strict consistency, which does away with the idea of a national
Church. Thus we can understand why it was that many people
went over from Congregationalism to Pietism and Presbyterian-
ism and vice versa, while others found it possible to hold these
views and yet to remain in the Established Church.
In all this, however, the fundamental element is still non-
ecclesiastical and akin to the sect-type; only it has not severed
its connection with Calvinist theology, and it does not, therefore,
need to be constituted by a baptismal rite of its own. This explains,
PROTESTANTISM 665
above all, the inconsistencies in the Congregationalist Church-
life of New England . 410
“Pilgrim” Communities
Let us now follow first of all the line of development which
led to the so-called Congregationalist Church principle. To it
belonged the Refugee or “Pilgrim” communities, which arose
out of the early beginnings (which have just been described), and
which emigrated first to Holland, and then to New England, in
order to preserve their nationality, and in the interest of their
mission to found a “purely democratic church”.
The English Government modified their persecuting laws to
this extent that they allowed the Separatists to emigrate — with
this proviso, however, that if they returned they would forfeit
all their property and be executed. While Browne had founded
a congregation in Middelburg, which soon went to pieces,
Barrowe’s followers then formed a similar Church in Amsterdam.
Under these circumstances the social position of this Church was
a difficult one. Farmers and scholars alike had to become manual
labourers, or to go into business. Meanwhile the anarchy pro-
phesied by Whitgift soon began to rear its head in the congre-
gation. The main democratic element, the majority principle,
lay-preaching or “prophesying”, brought all kinds of strife, hair-
splitting arguments, and rivalries in its train. There was a great
deal of argument about the constitution : should it be aristocratic
and Presbyterian, or ought it to be more democratic? The state-
ment that the Church is governed not by man but by the Spirit
of Christ is only another illustration of the influence of a pre-
eminently “spiritual” type of thought upon the whole ; in practice,
however, this idea had no influence at all. Robinson led a section
of the congregation away from all this confusion to Leyden ; he
solved the problem by making a distinction between the Church
government exercised by the elders, and the authority of the
Church exercised by the congregation, which really amounted
to this: that less important matters were settled by the elders,
and important questions by the majority of the Church members.
At the same time Robinson approved of the idea of a “Church
fellowship”, an advisory council representing the congregations
which in themselves were independent.
Pilgrim Fathers
The Pilgrim Fathers then carried these principles with them
to New England. There they succeeded in infusing their spirit
410 See p. 927.
666 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
into the numerous groups of Presbyterian settlers which arrived
later on. Not yet did that mean, however, freedom to organize
churches of all kinds. In New England, Calvinistic Congrega-
tionalists alone were recognized, and even the most important
political rights were bound up with Church membership. The
actual communicant body consisted only of those who were
considered “genuinely converted”, and who had signed the
Church Covenant. The children, however, were all baptized,
and were regarded as an outer circle within the Church, which,
without belonging to the central group of communicants, was
still regarded as Christian; these “adherents” also had to pay
Church taxes. They were only required to sign what their enemies
called a “half-way covenant”, however, which laid on them
merely the obligation to act in a generally Christian way. Thus,
in the colonies of New England, Congregationalism became the
State religion, and the local churches were brought into closer
relation with each other. This formed the starting-point of
American Congregationalism, which under the influence of the
Methodist Revival lost one section of its members to the Pres-
byterians and another section to the Unitarians, but which still
forms a large and influential community, whose constitutional
principles have come to be shared by a whole series of other
denominations, like the Baptists, the Seventh Day Adventists,
and the Unitarians . 411
Independency
The other process of development which has already been
mentioned, the Independency of the Cromwellian period, is an
entirely different phenomenon. It did not unite with the English
Congregationalists, who likewise had their origin in Leyden, and
who started with the Church of Jacobs, composed of Congrega-
tionalists who had returned to London, who later on, together
with the Presbyterians and the Baptists, combined to form English
Dissent.
In Parliament, in the Westminster Assembly, and among the
clergy, this form of English Congregationalism was only repre-
sented by a very small minority, and it was here prepared to
allow the continuance of the Established Church, merely stipu-
lating that the individual congregation should be independent,
have the right to excommunicate when required, and to elect
its own officers; it was prepared to admit a certain amount of
State control. The real support of the movement, however, came,
411 See p. 927.
PROTESTANTISM 667
not from these “Dissenting Brethren”, but from Cromwell’s Army.
It is, however, quite evident that this movement was neither
Brownism nor Barrowism, and that, owing to the course of
political history, it was also a good deal influenced from abroad.
Rather, in relation to the Established Church, it was a confused
and theoretical impulse towards inward illumination and ex-
perience, coupled with the demand for the right of lay-preaching,
which was exercised both by officers and by soldiers, a demand
for converted pastors, and for freedom to constitute churches
around a preacher who has been freely called by the Church.
It was a much more idealistic “spiritual” movement than either
Brownism or Barrowism; in many ways it resembled Luther’s
earlier teaching, and also Schwenckfeld’s smaller groups, which
were formed on the model of the Early Church.
These Independents claimed toleration towards themselves,
out of respect for tender consciences and for the witness of the
Spirit within individual souls, but they were then obliged to
grant it also to the “other sects”, on account of which the In-
dependents seemed to the Presbyterians like “Anabaptists and
Antinomians” ; they soon found, however, that unlimited tolera-
tion itself produced difficulties. The Independents even accepted
pastors appointed by the Parliamentary Commission, provided
that they were “genuinely converted”. On the question of lay-
preaching they went farther than Browne, claiming it as a right,
and in this they verged on fanaticism. At the same time the
whole ecclesiastical situation and the theory of the Church were
still most obscure.
In so far as Cromwell allowed himself to be influenced by
Harrison, the real patron of the sects in the Army and later of
the Fifth Monarchy Men, it is possible that he was actually
influenced by Baptist ideas. He always adhered, however, to the
idea of a union of toleration for all Protestants, and of Christian
unity and government of the nation without discarding the
technical organization of the Established Church. It was only
when the majority in the Barebones Parliament abolished the
system of tithes, which would have meant that parishes and
universities would have lost their means of support, and would
have been obliged to resort to the voluntary principle, that an
attempt was made to reorganize on a new basis. This attempt it
was, however, which caused Cromwell to dissolve this Assembly,
which was a convention of notables rather than a Parliament.
His own Church policy then took the line of appointing a Par-
liamentary Commission of Inquiry, composed as far as possible
668 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
of excellent people of different groups and tendencies, including
Presbyterians and Anglicans ; these men were called the “Tryers”.
Catholics alone were excluded on political grounds, and later,
after an attempt at rebellion, the Anglicans were also excluded.
Alongside of them, of course, the Separatist groups of the Baptists,
Congregationalists, and the Quakers were tolerated. Thus in
reality Independency was the religion of the State, since nearly
all the official positions were occupied by its followers, for the
most part earnest men of a Pietistic kind. The desire and choice
of individual congregations could thus be taken into consideration.
The whole procedure, and the toleration which was combined
with it, was characterized by a strong emphasis upon “spiritual
religion”; as we shall see later on, Cromwell’s chaplains were
enlightened men of this type. Nevertheless, Cromwell’s leading
ideas were Calvinistic. He also desired to see a Christian
State. He only extended the borders of Christian experience:
the conviction of sin, assurance, and a theology of grace ; these
are the marks of Christian experience. He also exercised moral
supervision over the people; only this was done not through
ecclesiastical courts of discipline, but through the State General
Majors.
Cromwell
Cromwell was also a firm believer in a theocracy. He classed
his own proceedings, and those of the Army, with the measures
taken by the magistrate injirieurs when the legitimate government
had failed. He regarded his own position as sanctified by Provi-
dence and the course of history, and therefore as his by Divine
Right. His religious convictions remain Calvinistic and Pre-
destinarian. Thus in principle both Cromwell and the Indepen-
dency of his Army were quite different from the Baptist movement,
in spite of various resemblances between the two.
His teaching about the Salus publica and the sovereignty of the
people is the Calvinistic doctrine of the duty of the nation to
establish a government according to the Will of God, and he
discerns the Will of God in the course of events. In questions
concerning property, law, and government he is therefore con-
servative in principle; more and more clearly his own position
is differentiated from that of the democratic, communistic, and
Chiliast radicals. From the very outset his Independency had
differed from theirs ; it had far less affinity with the Baptist move-
ment than had Brownism, but, unlike the latter, it had a greater
tendency towards “inwardness”; the latter tendency, however,
PROTESTANTISM 669
was modified by the Calvinistic idea of the State as an institution
which exists to serve and glorify God.
From this standpoint, as Lord Protector, Cromwell also ac-
cepted the universal Calvinistic policy of the union and protection
of Protestants. This was a Protestant international policy, the
last great expression of a denominational Protestant world policy,
after the manner of Bucer, Zwingli, Calvin, and the Landgrave
of Hesse. All the same, the Independency of Cromwell was only
an interim phase. The final revolution of 1688 fell back upon
ideas which were vital before Cromwell, and Independency
dispersed its remaining faithful adherents among the various Dis-
senting bodies : the Quakers, the Baptists, the Congregationalists,
and the Presbyterians. 412
At first Congregationalism and Independency were phenomena
whose range was limited, and moreover Independency was not
permanent. But the influence of both was great. The first result,
which was of universal importance in world history, was the
transition from the independent theory to the Locke doctrine of
the State, which developed into a theory which favoured free-
dom to form churches, and to the separation between Church
and State which was closely connected with political Liberalism.
We have already had a hint of this in the preceding pages, and
it now becomes plain in its historical setting. From the time of
Locke onwards this theory has been extended and developed as
a philosophy of the State right down to the present day. It has
become the ecclesiastical policy of Liberalism and of democracy.
The second still more important result is this : that in the con-
stitution of the United States of North America, and in the
constitutions of the North American individual States, the order-
ing of the ecclesiastical situation was practically shaped along
these lines, partly as a result of the actual existence of several
churches alongside of each other in the various States, partly,
however, also as the expression of the Congregationalist Calvinist
idea of the majesty of the Church, and of a freedom of conscience
which cannot be touched by the State. Although, in a general
way, it was held that the State was Christian in character, yet
so far as the churches were concerned it ought to have no
authority over them, nor be under any obligations towards them,
but it ought to leave the religious conscience alone; this is in
sharp contrast with the attempted separation between Church
and the State which has been taking place in Latin lands since
the French Revolution ; in reality this movement is the struggle
411 See p. 928.
670 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
of a free-thinking society against the power of the churches, and,
above all, against the Roman Catholic Church. The ecclesiastical
policy of the present day is being determined more and more
by those theories, and by this example of America . 413
Calvinism and the Free Church Principle
After this detailed examination into the question, it is impos-
sible to attribute these results directly to Calvinism itself; they
may rather be described as due to the influence of a modified
Calvinism affected by Baptist and “spiritual” influences. It is,
however, always a fact that even the genuinely Calvinistic
Churches, in face of the mingling of peoples and religions, and
of the increasing tendency to secularize the State, have followed
this example . 414 This fact is, however, of decisive importance for
the modern forms of Calvinism. Nearly everywhere Calvinistic
Free Churches have grown up alongside of National Churches.
In Geneva itself separation prevails to-day. The manifesto of
Kuyper, often mentioned, which the University of Princeton has
almost made official, teaches the Free Church system directly as
a fundamental Calvinistic theory. Everywhere then, connected
with that is the tendency towards the liberal or democratic con-
stitutions which make possible to every ecclesiastical party, and
to every church, freedom of movement, and an honourable place
in public opinion.
In its passage through the Free Church phase the main block
of Calvinism became Liberal in politics, and it participates so
closely in the tendency of the sects towards an individualistic
and purely utilitarian conception of the State that to-day, in tjiis
respect, there is scarcely any difference between it and them.
Above, in another connection, the tendency of Calvinism to form
constitutional theories of the State has already been pointed out.
Free Church Calvinism, however, went farther than that, and
became receptive towards the idea of democracy itself. It was
only in this amalgamation of the Free Church system with
democracy that it received its present-day relation to political
individualism. Thus at the present day Calvinism (including the
sect-movement) is diametrically opposed to the Lutheran State
Church system, and it proudly claims to be the only form of
Christianity which appeals to the modern mind. It has not, of
course, produced democracy, but in its Free Church form it has
encouraged it. Wherever natural conditions favoured democracy —
as, for instance, in the colonies of New England — Calvinism gave
414 See p» 930. 414 See p. 93 1 .
PROTESTANTISM 671
it a decided impetus, adjusted its life in accordance with demo-
cratic principles, and inspired it with its own spirit of the in-
dependence of the individual of all earthly authority. 414 *
Free Church Principle
and Religious Toleration
Religious toleration was one logical result of the rise of Con-
gregationalism and of the Free Church movement. Some time
elapsed, however, before this principle was fully accepted. The
main obstacles to be overcome were (1) the Calvinistic idea that
each religious body was the sole possessor of the Truth, and
(2) the theory of the Christian nature of the State. Final accep-
tance of the principle was also delayed until pure Calvinism had
adopted the principle of toleration.
The ideal of the early Congregationalists was expressed in the
following terms: freedom to form independent churches; the
abolition of State compulsion in religious matters ; and the ex-
clusion of all heretical forms of religion from the State. The
Congregationalist Puritans of New England perpetuated these
principles ; they compelled no one to join the Church ; but they
declined to tolerate the existence of any other church, and they
gave important civic rights to the members of the Church. Here,
then, we see the purely negative theory at work, which forbids
compulsion in religious matters, while at the same time no room
is left at all for the positive existence of different religious com-
munions alongside of one another. It was not until the eighteenth
century that positive toleration was introduced, and then that
was mainly due to a slackening of religious interest and to the
growth of various secular trade interests. In England the Long
Parliament only granted toleration to the various groups within
Calvinistic Protestantism ; in order to secure the Christian nature
of the State it maintained the Elizabethan legislation which made
attendance at public worship compulsory ; the only difference was
that individuals were now at liberty to choose the religious group
with which they desired to worship. As occasion offered, Brownists
and Independents then claimed that religious freedom should be
granted also to Baptists, Socinians, Arminians, and even to Jews
and Muhammadans. They based this demand on “spiritual”
grounds, urging that the external form of worship was a matter
of comparative indifference compared with the importance of
the inward revelation. Milton was the most “advanced” repre-
sentative of this group; he, however, modified his Puritan and
4U * See p. 931.
672 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
“spiritual” ideas with a strong dash of the intellectual spirit of
the Renaissance. Cromwell declared that freedom of conscience
was a natural right of humanity ; finally, however, on political
grounds he was obliged to deny this right to Catholics, Anglicans,
and radical Baptists; he had a firm belief also in the Christian
nature of the State, and in a State Church system of at least a
formal and administrative kind. It was only the Baptists, the
Quakers, and Roger Williams, who maintained that from the
spiritual point of view all religious denominations ought to
receive equal recognition, and that the State, which is based upon
the Law of Nature, and only administers the Second Table of
the Decalogue, ought to be neutral towards the religious aims
of Society; in the same way the State is here conceived in a
purely utilitarian sense. Williams threw in his lot with the
Baptists, but they very soon turned him out, and he then gave
himself up to an undenominational kind of “spiritual religion”.
As the founder of Rhode Island he persuaded the new colony
to found its constitution upon the basis of complete religious
toleration; Williams also held the view that the nature of the
State was Christian.
As an actual principle religious toleration was not accepted
until Locke had formulated his theory of Church and State. In
the constitution of the American States it then became a matter
of practical politics, in which, out of respect for the majesty of
conscience, the human rights of liberty of worship, and of the
freedom of the individual conscience, were made the constitutional
basis of the individual States; otherwise, however, in America
the general Christian character of the State has been preseryed
quite naturally in various institutions, and above all in the national
spirit, down to the present day.
Jellinek has shown us that this formulation of the right to
worship according to one’s conscience, as a human right which
ought to be guaranteed constitutionally, forced its way into juridi-
cal formulation, together with the “rights of humanity” already
proclaimed by the Natural Law of the Enlightenment, and that
this formulation was then carried over into the constitutions of
Europe. The idea of the “calling” is another illustration of the
same process — which shows plainly that many an independent
idea which to-day has no religious basis at all grew originally
out of the soil of religion. This fact, and above all the proclama-
tion of liberty of worship as an inalienable human right, can
only be attributed to Puritanism in so far as this term includes
Quakers and Baptists, above all as we take into account the
PROTESTANTISM 673
softening influence of “inward religion” with its tendency to
assign a very relative importance to external dogmatic forms.
The only real source of toleration is that individualistic form of
spirituality which considers that all external religious forms are
merely relative; the only Calvinistic element in this point of
view is the feeling that the State has no right to interfere with
religion.
Further, we ought not to forget that in addition to these
religious forces there were many other external reasons, especially
“enlightened” rationalistic ideas, which helped to shape these
constitutional principles. The principle of religious toleration
only penetrated into actual Calvinism with the growth of the
Pietistic Separatist churches, coupled with the growth of many
forms of religious belief and worship within one nation. At the
present time it interprets the early Calvinistic idea of the sove-
reignty of religion and of the Church in the sense of freedom
from the State, and therefore as the principle of liberty of worship.
At the same time its main trend is evangelical and orthodox.
So far as genuine Calvinism is concerned toleration is still a
purely political question, which aims at making the Church
independent of the State ; it does not deal with questions within
the Church itself. Genuine Calvinism regards the existence of
several churches alongside of one another as a provisional arrange-
ment which constitutes a problem incapable of being solved by
human minds. Only at the Last Day will this problem be solved
in the interest of the pure Truth. The process of sifting truth
from error will be carried out by the Judgment of God, not by
the effort of man, nor by the decision of the State. These argu-
mdhts are still based upon the assumption that the State, and
Society in general — with their moral foundation of Natural Law
and the conscience of rulers — are Christian in character. In this
respect as well, however, Neo-Calvinism considers that it is the
supporter of modern progress ; above all, it differs from primitive
Calvinism in the development of the Free Church system and
in religious toleration . 416
Neo-Calvinism
In so doing, however, Neo-Calvinism has adjusted the relative
Natural Law of the fallen State, which, originally, was strongly
conservative, even though in comparison with Lutheranism it
was far more rationalistic, to the modern classical rationalistic
Natural Law of Liberalism. This latter conception is, of course,
415 See p. 933.
p
vol. n.
674 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
not a product of Calvinism. On its theoretical side it was created
by Humanistically inclined jurists, who drew their inspiration
from a Stoicism which was freed from Christian influences, and
from the Roman Law, and also by modern psychological philoso-
phers, with their habit of deducing everything from experience . 416
Since, however, this conception has also been strongly influenced
by the Calvinistic and Scholastic conception of the Christian Law
of Nature, which some of it has actually assimilated, it is not
difficult to understand how it was that Calvinism of the Free
Church type, which was democratic and Liberal in its practical
political experience, adopted these ideas. The union of Church
and State in primitive Calvinism was based upon the duty of
the Christian government towards God, and also upon the con-
viction that the institutions of relative Natural Law are entirely
unable to satisfy the needs of human society without the help
of the Church as the organ of the Grace of God. When, however,
Church and State were separated and the secular institutions
were set upon their own feet, i.e. upon the basis of Natural Law
alone, it was then inevitable that this basis of Natural Law should
throw off the shackles of the ancient, merely relative, Christian
Natural Law, and with that the need of being completed by the
Church. More and more the idea gained ground of an auto-
nomous rational Natural Law, which conceived and taught men
to realize the purely utilitarian ends of the secular institutions
by the light of pure reason alone, without the co-operation of
the authority of revelation. Or, to express the same thing in
theological terms : the Law of Nature expressed in the Second
Table of the Decalogue can be realized without also realizing the
First Table, which, in the fallen State, no longer belongs to Wie
Law of Nature. This was the kind of argument which had already
been employed by Milton, Roger Williams, and Bayle. Thus men
felt they could quietly accept the modern secular Natural Law,
and indeed all the more, since increasingly, in true English style,
it was constructed on essentially empirical and utilitarian lines.
But, as in the case of the Calvinists of New England in the
eighteenth century, men also found it possible to adapt them-
selves to the French conception of Natural Law, with its rationa-
listic and idealistic temper, which was based on the theory of
the autonomy and equality of the individual reason. Thus we
can understand how it is that Neo-Calvinism has been profoundly
influenced by the conception of the Law of Nature, whilst histori-
cally and theologically it justified this point of view by stressing
416 See p. 936.
PROTESTANTISM 675
Calvin’s tendencies in the direction of a rationalistic Natural Law,
which have already been described in the foregoing pages. The
theocratic spirit has entirely disappeared. 416a
Neo-Calvinism extends the principle of the formation of all
fellowship by means of association to every relationship in life,
and everywhere it manifests a tendency to form societies for
ecclesiastical and religious ends, as well as for civic and cultural
purposes. Instead of the endowments, institutions, and corpora-
tions of hereditary entailed property belonging to class and guild
associations, there arises the principle of the free formation of
“societies”, since, indeed, at bottom both the Church and the
State are themselves “societies”. Upon the basis of the uniformity
between the laws of Scripture and of Nature, Neo-Calvinism lays
stress upon the co-operation of Christianity and Humanity in a
sense quite foreign to the older Calvinism. From that standpoint
it then proceeds to develop a pacifist international spirit and
pacifist propaganda, champions the rights of humanity, en-
courages the anti-slavery movement, and allies itself with philan-
thropic and humanitarian movements. The Feminist movement
also found some support here, long before other denominations
dared to broach the subject. The earnest Christian sections of
American and English Protestantism — which, in England, under
the influence of the Evangelicals, includes also a large part of
the State Church — represent the humane, freedom-loving, and
cosmopolitan ethic of Liberalism . 417
Thus even Cromwell believed that it was possible to combine
the salus publica of the Natural Law with the Christian idea of
salvation, and with this idea of the Christian State he combined
a relatively modern and liberal and utilitarian system of politics.
In this respect, however, the most interesting example is that of
Gladstone, the great modern representative of Christian politics.
He was an Anglican, it is true, but he inclined more and more
^towards Nonconformity. Politically and ethically, his ideals were
those of the Nonconformists. Thus for ethical reasons he supported
Liberalism, extended the franchise, and declared his conviction
that in the settlement of problems of foreign policy the method
of arbitration was both possible and desirable. His policy was
decidedly Christian, and in the secular sphere he was just as
decided that the basis was that of Natural Law. If we compare
with that the idea of a Christian State represented by Julius Stahl
and Bismarck, the great difference between the continental
Lutheran and the Anglo-Saxon world of thought, determined
tt6a Sec p. 937. " 7 See p. 937.
676 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
or influenced by Calvinism, stands out in clear relief. That,
however, these differences are not due to the Anglo-Saxon tem-
perament is shown by the fact that the Dutch ex-Minister Kuyper
represents a similar Liberal-Natural-Law conception of secular
affairs. In all these questions Neo-Calvinism has drifted far away
from Calvin — a fact which Kuyper tried in vain to conceal. In
the handling of secular questions it has formally come very close
to modern Liberalism and Utilitarianism, and the latter finds
in it (in Neo-Calvinism) one of the great moral forces which
it lacks upon the Continent. At the same time it still keeps a
sufficiently clear distinction, which is usually quite explicit,
between itself and the abstract French doctrine of democracy
and of equalitarian Natural Law . 418
In surveying this development as a whole it becomes evident
that, in the development of Calvinism as a Free Church system,
an element was released which, from the very beginning, had
been implicit in the idea of the “holy community”, which, how-
ever, was there combined with the idea of the unity of Christian
Society, and with the principle of its sole guarantee in a com-
pulsory religious unity. The separation between these two ideas
only took place under the pressure of the English Revolution,
and with the help of “spiritual” and Baptist influences. The
result was that that social ideal of absolute conformity was set
aside, and the secular social doctrines were committed to a con-
ception of Natural Law which was entirely utilitarian, while the
Christian standards were maintained, directly, solely in the
churches, and only because these ideals were realized, to some
extent, within the churches did they spread farther, and pene-
trate Society as a spiritual and social force. To-day faith believes
that finally these two currents will coalesce, since the God who
is the source of the Natural Law, is the Same who creates the
Church. Thus these nations which have been deeply influenced
by Calvinism, in spite of the loss of outer conformity, do believe
in an inner permanent conformity. Everything depends on how
long both these spheres of life will be immune from the specifically
modern type of criticism, and how long they can still consider
that the practical demands of life are easily met by “common
sense”. At present these nations only know the modern world
essentially as a political, social-economic, and technical develop-
ment, and they have been enabled to adjust their religion to this
way of life . 419 In this respect, however, great changes have taken
place since Darwin, Herbert Spencer, Bentham, John Stuart
418 See p. 938. 419 See p. 940.
PROTESTANTISM 677
Mill, and Ruskin, and increasingly such changes will continue
to take place.
Influence of Later Calvinism:
(II) Puritanism and Pietism
This integral element of Calvinism, however, which centres
round the idea of the holy community, found other avenues of
expression than those of Congregationalism and the Free
Churches, which were soon drawn into close connection with
Unitarianism, the Enlightenment, and with intellectual develop-
ment in general; modern Congregationalism in particular likes
to emphasize the connection between its belief in liberty of con-
science and the scientific love of truth . 420 This “holy community ”
idea might also develop within the Church merely as the intensi-
fication of the idea of sanctification and asceticism, and this
is what actually happened in the development of Puritanism and
Pietism. From the very outset this possibility of development
belonged to the very nature of Calvinism. Is it not customary
to call Bucer, who had such a decided influence over Calvin,
“the Pietist among the Reformers”? And Calvin himself is often
described as a “Rigorist”. Here also, however, this tendency
needed to be released and developed in one particular direc-
tion by definite circumstances. It emerged first of all within
the setting of a wide general national life, which became to
Calvinism the menace of secularization, a difficulty which could
no longer be solved by Calvin’s ideals administered in the
Genevan style by the exercise of discipline. This danger did not
arise in Geneva itself, where the Huguenots were entirely ab-
sorbed in the great political struggle, nor in Scotland, where
religion was organized entirely on the principles of Geneva.
Puritanism, however, had a very decided development in “Merrie
England”, with its dominant State Church — in the Netherlands,
which never became completely Calvinist, and where the
powers of the court of discipline in particular were much
restricted — in the West German provinces, which were influenced
by the Netherlands, and in America, which had been awakened
by Methodism; through these channels Puritanism also pene-
trated into the life of the French and the Swiss churches in the
nineteenth century. In Germany also, which likewise was menaced
by the danger of secularization, and above all where Lutheranism
was struggling for its life against a rigid and lifeless orthodoxy,
it gave rise to a similar reform movement, to some extent stimu-
4 *° See p. 940.
678 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
lated by the example of Calvinistic Pietism; from that time
forward the separation between Lutheranism and Calvinism has
been lessened. At the present day the whole of the Church life
of the Continent is deeply influenced by the spirit of Anglo-Saxon
Methodist Pietism.
Puritanism in England
English Calvinism was founded in the reign of Edward VI ;
it first appeared in Cambridge, where Bucer had worked , 421 and
in London, where the foreign churches, which were under the
leadership of John k Lasko, set an example from the very be-
ginning 422 of spirituality and strictness of life. During the reign
of Elizabeth, under the influence of the exiles who were then
returning from the Continent, English Calvinism drew much
closer to the Genevan ideal, and it was also in close contact with
Scottish Calvinism. It then gradually divided into three main
currents, Presbyterianism, Congregationalism, and Puritanism,
which often merged into one another.
Presbyterianism was very clearly defined by Cartwright.
Aided by Scotland during the period of the Long Parliament, it
hoped to become the State religion of England. This is genuine
Calvinism, spread throughout a great nation by a system of synods ;
it needs no further description here. It seems probable that in the
main Cromwell himself belonged to the Puritan movement 423 , from
which he was only diverted for a time by his respect for the actual
providential guidance of the nation through events and by his
expectant confidence in the new revelations. A man like Baxter
is a good representative of Puritan thought and achievement at
its best. Down to the present day, too, the whole of English
Pietism and Continental Pietism is still fed and nourished by the
devotional books of Bunyan, the Baptist tinker.
The movement began by attacking the Catholic elements in
the Anglican Church, coupled with the demand for the institution
of a court of Church discipline, and for the formation of “pure”
bodies of communicants. Under the Stuarts, however, it then
became a real religious awakening, a demand for a second
Reformation, in which reform in doctrine should be followed by
reform in life, and which desired to realize personal spirituality
and holiness as the true essence of Christianity.
421 Sec Harvey: Butzer in England , igo 6 (Dissertation of Marburg), with interesting
information about Bucer’s socio-political proposals from De regno Chrisli,
pp. 77S5 ; here already the conflict had begun against enclosures, monopolies,
and miscarriage of justice. 422 See p. 940. 428 See p. 941.
PROTESTANTISM
679
The following elements were characteristic of this Puritan
movement: “prophesyings” or discussions in church between the
minister and the congregation about the sermon and passages
of Scripture; family worship, which included catechetical in-
struction, conducted by the father of the family, care in the
religious instruction of the young in matters which “pertain
unto salvation”, since it is essential that each individual should
know for himself all the conditions of salvation, as ignorance
leads to Hell, as Bunyan teaches very vividly in the Pilgrim's
Progress ; extempore prayer instead of a formal liturgy; severe
self-discipline, systematically aiming at holiness — which explains
the number of autobiographies, spiritual diaries and journals,
and the stress laid on the duty of meditation ; avoidance of all
profane pleasures, and a strict voluntary separation between the
Puritans and the unconverted “children of this world”, or of
the state of Nature; the demand for ascetic practices, and, above
all, for the most strenuous industry as the best method of spiritual
and corporal discipline ; a system of casuistry and of careful self-
examination and consultation, combined with a very thorough
exercise of the cure of souls ; its popular character, the provision
of elementary education, and the effort to raise the general level
of social life anlong “the people”; extreme simplicity of life in
matters of comfort and of dress, which, however, did not prevent
a certain dignity and sterling excellence of deportment ; practical
capacity, reliability, and honesty in every walk in life, which is
displayed in a very considerable amount of activity in practical
affairs — in politics, in social questions, and in commerce ; and,
finally, the spirit of unity, which, by laying emphasis solely upon
practical experience, and the need to be “living epistles, known
and read of all men”, abolished the barriers between the Pro-
testant denominations, and united all “believers” in the “saint-
liness” of Pietism.
In all this the Puritans were consciously opposed to the Re-
naissance spirit, and the literature of the Elizabethan and Stuart
periods. They were also entirely opposed to the policy and
economic standards of feudal times, which were expressed in the
enclosures and in great monopolies. Shakespeare’s hatred of these
Pietists with their hostility to sensuous pleasures, and Butler’s
scorn for their theological narrowness and pedantry, are well
known.
The following Puritan characteristics bring out the difference
between this movement and that of primitive Calvinism: a far
more intense individualism, which, in spite of all the means of
68o THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
grace, sets God and the soul over against each other in solitary
immediacy; a detailed estimate of and examination into good
works as “signs” of election, which introduces a legalism, self-
righteousness, and a systematic asceticism to an extent which was
unknown in genuine Calvinism; the spirit of solitary individual
self-control and ascetic discipline, which does not exclude pleasure
in the gifts and revelation of God in Nature, but which still dis-
tinguishes the elect, who use the “speech of Canaan” and whose
manner of life is strict, from the children of “the world” and the
“children of wrath”. In all this the influence of new motives
is undeniable. These new motives may be thus briefly summarized :
the individualizing effects of the dogma of predestination, the
collapse of strict ecclesiasticism through a period of ecclesiastical
strife, and the division of Society into the strict and the lax.
Naturally that produced a very different situation from that
which had obtained in Calvin’s strictly uniform Christian State.
On the other hand, this kind of Puritanism differs from
Lutheran Pietism in its still unshaken loyalty to the Church,
in its lack of emphasis upon a passionate “conviction of sin”
and of a sudden emotional “assurance” of grace, and in the
systematic logical result of progressive sanctification. Since in
Lutheranism justification by faith is regarded as the key which
suddenly unlocks the door of the heavenly treasury, and the
happiness to which this gives rise is regarded as the only clear
proof that the soul is in a state of grace, the central body of
Lutheran Pietism naturally concentrated on “conviction of sin”
and the “sense of assurance”. In Calvinism, however, grace is
something which existed before the world was, and slowly aqd
gradually evolves in election. Thus in Puritanism conversion was
regarded as the effect of predestination which had gradually
evolved, and it believed in the careful control and cultivation
of this process, and not in “feelings”, which a mere temporal
faith can have also. Thus it was easier to combine loyalty to
the Church with this conception, since it is precisely the means
of grace which mediate this progress, and from the very outset
the fact that they are “spiritually” conceived does not hinder
the inwardness of faith. In order to compensate for the aridity
and austerity of the asceticism of sanctification mysticism is called
in to help. Since, however, it was here combined with the Cal-
vinistic idea of the insertio in Christum non otiosum , this kind of
mysticism had a more practical and active tendency than that
of Lutheranism. Chiliastic ideas appeared now and again, but on
the whole they were comparatively rare, and it is not certain
PROTESTANTISM
68 1
to what extent they may possibly have been introduced by
Anabaptists and fanatics.
Thus this Calvinistic Puritan Pietism was somewhat different
from Continental Pietism. It was the moral school of the English
middle classes, and after the fluctuations of the great period of
the Enlightenment in England it reappeared as early as the
eighteenth century — this time, however, in the shape of Metho-
dism, which was indeed in the line of the old Puritan tradition,
though it also contained some essentially new elements. There will
be more to say about this later on, when Methodism is described,
since it finally joined the ranks of the Separatists. The Evangelical
spirit which it produced, which repeatedly led the attack on the
Enlightenment, in spite of various deviations, reveals even to-day
the power of the Puritan Calvinistic Spirit, and has also extended
its influence to non-Calvinistic Church-groups . 424
At the outset the social structure of Puritanism included people
from all ranks of Society. To the extent, however, in which it
became a “Holiness” movement it became the religion of the
middle classes, and since its revival through Methodism in Eng-
land and America this has become more and more its settled
character. The lay element became predominant, and theology
and clericalism were regarded as secondary; finally, after the
Revolution the court and the aristocracy broke with it altogether.
Its way of life did not commend itself to the higher officials and
the nobility, and it could only be forced upon the naturalism
of the rural population (which was so difficult to break) with
great limitations. When this whole movement was classed as
“lessen t”, alongside of the Established Church and the official
world, the groups which composed it were forced from the very
beginning into the world of commerce. This bourgeois spirit of
the middle classes was carried over to New England at the very
beginning by the Pilgrim Fathers, and in spite of the extremely
primitive economic conditions of existence which prevailed there
at first they developed the bourgeois and capitalist character
which forms the predominant element in the American people,
and which finally triumphed over the aristocratic and slave-
holding colonies of the Southern States.
This is the group which supports Liberalism in politics, and
which, from the economic point of view, out of the fundamental
conditions of Calvinism which in general were already favourable,
developed, with peculiar energy and with a sober realism, the
spirit which gave to the bourgeois capitalism of these peoples the
424 See p. 941.
68a THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
ideal foundations for its extensive development and success among
the masses of the people. 425
“Precisianism” in the Netherlands
Calvinism in the Netherlands developed along similar lines,
but its results were different. With the continuance of the Baptist
groups, and of the mystical movements with their emphasis
upon “spiritual religion”, as well as with the formation of a
strong Puritan Pietist group within the Calvinistic State Church,
the same elements were present which in England led to the
explosion of the great Revolution. All that was lacking was the
opposition of a persecuting Catholicizing State Church, and an
inner political crisis in the system of government. Here, however,
from the very outset the bourgeois republic had a tendency to
adopt the secular ideals of Calvinism, and here also the eccle-
siastical ideals of Calvinism were finally realized in a compara-
tively satisfactory manner. Thus the Puritan development in
the Netherlands was confined to a strongly ascetic and rigorist
movement of those who were nicknamed the “Precisians” or the
“Stalwarts”. This movement was composed of people who were
opposed to the Humanistic culture of the Renaissance, and to
its accompanying phenomena of a fabulous economic develop-
ment, which surpassed that of all the other nations of Europe
at that time, and they formed themselves into small groups
within the National State Church. A tendency in this direction
had already existed within Dutch Calvinism from the time when
the first national synod had met outside the Dutch boundaries at
Emden in 1571, and had there first felt its solidarity as a national
body, and had tried to formulate an ecclesiastical system for
the whole nation. While in Holland itself it was impossible to
make any attempts at Church organization owing to the Spanish
tyranny, and then to the ecclesiastical chaos which was only
regulated with difficulty by the local authorities, the exiled Cal-
vinists tried to organize their Church system on the Huguenot
pattern. This ecclesiastical system, which made a clear distinction
between the wider circle of the baptized and the narrower circle
of those who had been explicitly received into the Church through
Confirmation, and which also had a strict system of moral dis-
cipline, showed its evident connection with small and strict
refugee churches. After the Union of Utrecht (1579) the exiles
gradually began to return to Holland; they then proceeded to
make treaties with the various State authorities of particular
485 Sec p. 942.
PROTESTANTISM 683
provinces, by which they created Calvinistic State churches,
which, however, alongside of themselves tolerated the existence
of minorities which held other opinions ; these churches also had
to submit to a considerable amount of State supervision, par-
ticularly with reference to the exercise of ecclesiastical discipline.
Everywhere, too, they were hostile to the earlier and more liberal
Reform movement in the Netherlands, and also to the great
cities, which were mainly concerned with commerce, and there-
fore in their own interest were in favour of a policy of religious
toleration. Even as early as the Synod of Emden (1571) the
hostility between the Preciesen (i.e. the rabid Calvinists) and the
Rekkelijken (i.e. the party of compromise) was quite evident.
After the State churches had been formed the opposition
became more intense. The conflict raged round the questions of
a strict Calvinistic constitution, a strict creed, the ethical ideal of
Rigorism. “Precisians” and “Libertines” now faced each other
in hostile camps. In this situation the primary concern of the
strict Calvinists was the exclusion of the Arminians, whose
outlook was predominantly humanist and deeply influenced by
Erasmus, and who also stood out for the ecclesiastical dignity
of the State, and for the independence and variety of conditions
within each individual State; the strict Calvinists also opposed
all the groups which supported the Arminians. Their endeavours
were crowned with success by the treaty between the Stadtholder
(who in the person of the Prince of Orange was likewise con-
cerned for the attainment of national unity) and the strict
Calvinist party at the Synod of Dort in 1618. This Synod laid
down a host of regulations, which, with the aid of the Govern-
ment, they hoped would help to make the Netherlands strictly
Calvinist. It was, however, realized that this goal could not be
attained by external means alone, and indeed, within a short
time, Arminianism and Erastianism had to be tolerated once
more, in accordance with the position adopted by the different
States in particular. The strict Calvinists now realized that they
could best attain their end by personal dealing in spiritual
matters; if this were unsuccessful, then the “Libertines” might
have to be excommunicated by the Church courts. Taffin and
Udemann led the way, but in the main the authorities borrowed
their methods of dealing with these difficulties from English
Puritanism. Wilhelm Teellinck, the father of Pietism in the
Netherlands, began his career under the influence of impressions
of English Puritanism which he had gained during a journey in
England. The other leaders, and Voet in particular, made great
684 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
use of English literature, and many English books were translated
into Dutch. One of the leading founders of Pietism in the Nether-
lands, Amesius, was an English refugee, and Lodensteyn also
wished to prepare himself for his practical activity by a journey
to England.
Here also, therefore, the transition from Calvinism to a Pietism
which was more individualistic, based on the “conventicle”
pattern, pastoral, and strongly mystical, was almost unnoticeable.
But as time went on, and its latent tendencies began to develop,
it became very plain that a great gulf separated this kind of
Pietism, which was entirely orthodox in theology, and also loyal
to the National Church, from the primitive Calvinism of a united
national community sanctified by the sovereignty of Christ. A
widespread system of conventicles arose with a wealth of ascetic
literature ; the watchword of the pastors of this school of thought
was the theologia regenitoium ; the laity was permitted to take part
in public worship in the conventicles, in which women also were
permitted to teach. The children of grace and of election sepa-
rated themselves from the children of the world; they observed
the Sabbath very strictly; they practised casuistry and self-
examination and systematic asceticism, in which they were not
afraid of taking hints from the Jesuits and from the Catholics
in general. Home and Foreign Missions were carried on; and
great stress was laid on conversion and the visible signs of con-
version. Here too, as in England, the doctrine of good works as
the signs and tokens of the fact of election was accepted, with
which was combined a similar strict systematic legalism and
exercise of self-discipline. Here also the individualistic spirit was
revealed in diaries, autobiographies, narratives of edifying death-
beds, as well as in the practice of family worship and in the cure
of souls. The Pietists found it almost impossible to bring the
secularized National Church to this austere way of life, and here
too they took refuge in the ideas of eschatology and Chiliasm.
Especially they balanced the prevailing hard, sober, and dry
spirit of legalism and of discipline with a spirit of mystical
devotion akin to the early mysticism of the Netherlands, the
mysticism of St. Bernard, and the mystical interpretation of the
Song of Songs ; in other words, this led to the incursion of an
emotional and contemplative individualism which was entirely
remote from the spirit of Calvin. Here early national traditions
again broke through. Voet explicitly described his teacher Teel-
linck as a “Calvinistic Thomas a Kempis”.
The only difference between this renewed asceticism and the
PROTESTANTISM 685
older kind was this: the Dutch Pietists explicitly claimed that
all secular callings ought to be penetrated by this spirit, and
they violently opposed every endeavour to exempt secular life
from this demand. It was explicitly an asceticism within the
ordinary life of the world. Thus the Pietists did not desire Sepa-
ratism, but the sanctification both of the nation and of the
Church. Unbelievers were to be excluded, and believers were
to rule ; it ought not to be the other way round. In the true spirit
of Calvinism the Pietist leaders kept their gaze fixed on life as
a whole, and they continually made fresh attempts to gain the
aid of the authorities in their endeavours after holiness. Their
main efforts were engaged in the struggle against patronage,
against luxury, against modern philosophy, and against the prin-
ciple of toleration ; they were, however, not very successful among
the upper classes. However, the period of suffering caused by
the wars of Louis XIV became a period of great popular success,
which also led to a modification of the legal severity into a more
evangelical, less Old Testament spirit. The programme of the
sanctification of the whole Church, and of the masses, on these
lines naturally could not be actually realized. Thus, in the end,
Separatist phenomena appeared ; and, on the other hand, radical
individual mystics severed their connection with ecclesiastical
orthodoxy. Mystical inwardness and the sectarian spirit, which
had never died out in the Netherlands, carried many religious
people away from the Church, as we shall see later on. A strong
section of Pietist Christians, however, remained within the State
churches all through the whole period of the Enlightenment,
arjjd through the confusion of the Napoleonic period.
When the Netherlands became a unified State and a Kingdom,
and the Calvinistic State Church also had to be reorganized, then
these Pietists broke off as the “separated Reformed Church”,
that is, as an orthodox and Pietistic Free Church. This Church
still plays an important part in the life of the Netherlands, and,
under its leader .Kuyper (who has often been mentioned in this
book), through a common policy with the Catholics, it has won
for the time being an absolutely dominant position. In his his-
torical, theoretical, and political writings Kuyper has made an
intelligent and even brilliant study of this type of Neo-Calvinism,
which is certainly better represented among Anglo-Saxons than
on the Continent. Still in many respects this Netherlands Free
Church may be compared with English Dissent . 428
The social composition of this Pietist Calvinism of the Nether-
426 See p. 943.
686 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
lands, which in the seventeenth century generally coincided with
strict Calvinism, and by this means dominated the main body
of the nation, cannot be ascertained from the material which
is at present available. It is well known that the rich merchant
class, above all that of Amsterdam, was Arminian in temper,
and that the politicians valued toleration as the salvation of the
Netherlands; it was certainly to the advantage of the exiled
English and French Calvinists, the Mennonites and the sects, as
also of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews, that is, of groups
which both politically and economically formed an integral part
of the Calvinist Republic. It is also well known that the town
population was far larger than the agricultural population, and
that the peasantry had already begun to turn towards a capital-
istic technical method of pursuing agriculture, and were thus not
so very remote from bourgeois Calvinism; in spite of that the
Pietists fought hard against rural fairs, and we may conclude that
among the peasants there was a good deal of resistance to their
Rigorism. We may therefore assume that here also this strict
Calvinism was mainly bourgeois and middle class. Here, how-
ever, it had no occasion to stand out in such pronounced
opposition to the aristocratic way of life as English Puritanism
and its successors, Dissent and the Evangelical Party. At this
point it felt itself in harmony with the spirit of the Republic
and of the bourgeois social order; it is impossible to isolate
and distinguish any particular social doctrines as peculiar to the
Calvinistic Pietism of the Netherlands . 427
Pietism in the Churches of the
Lower Rhine and of Switzerland
The Pietism in the Reformed Churches of the Lower Rhine,
which at first was closely connected with the Calvinism of the
Netherlands, and which also after the formation of the Nether-
lands State Churches was permanently influenced by it, does not
need to be described in detail. Here the same features recur. In
these Churches, however, Pietism was maintained more con-
tinuously, since in these lands Calvinism never became a State
Church, but always — first of all “under the Cross”, then tolerated
and supported by Brandenburg, finally taken into the Rhenish-
Westphalian Church — it had to prove its right to exist by an
intensified practical holiness, and it never had any connection
with National or State Churches. In this region, therefore, Pietism
has always remained particularly strong, and is so at the present
487 See p. 945.
PROTESTANTISM
687
time, providing a favourable atmosphere for a very flourishing
sectarian movement. This Pietist movement had no visible effect
on politics ; as a minority religion it was shut out from all wider
political influence, although even at the present day it is not
regarded with favour by the Prussian authorities. Its economic
results are well known. They have not been confined within the
limits of a Pietist middle class, but they include the great and
rich merchants and manufacturers ; this is quite intelligible, since
there is here no privileged class of landowners, nor any social
group which would be out of harmony with vital Pietist prin-
ciples . 428
There is just as little need to describe the Calvinistic Pietism
of Switzerland. It owed its origin to the influence of German
Pietism ; from the outset, therefore, it cannot be interpreted from
the point of view of Calvinism. The religious awakenings of the
nineteenth century in French Switzerland were also due to foreign
influence. The Calvinistic setting has, however, had a strong in-
fluence upon this Pietism, and has stamped upon it the charac-
teristics of ecclesiastical Puritanism. Politically the Swiss Pietists
belong to aristocratic conservative circles; they really form a
republican aristocracy. Its economic and social effects which
attract most attention are the industrialism of French Switzer-
land, the wealth of Basle, and its great services to the common
weal . 429
In North America, moreover, it is impossible to isolate Cal-
vinistic, Puritan, and sectarian influences. Each particular
question would need to be studied in much closer detail. In this
connection we can only emphasize the fact, which is generally
redbgnized, that everywhere the Puritanism of the leading Eng-
lish section in American life is regarded, even down to the present
day, as an essential element of American political and social life,
although, so far as I can ascertain, no one has ever yet thrown
a clear light upon the precise connection between the two
facts . 430
488 See Gdbel: Gesch. des christlichen Lebens. A great part of the more important
passages have already been utilized above ; here it is mainly clear how Calvinism
and Pietism merge into one another. On this point cf. Ritschl: Gesch, des
Pietismus , I; Simons: Synodalbuch und die Kirchen unter dem Kreuz- The Pietism of
the Wuppertal, with its results in economic and ethical life, must be regarded
as well known.
418 See Ritschl, /; the rest is based upon general impressions; in any case
Basle is a model of social ethics of a Pietist-Calvinistic kind.
480 See p. 945.
688 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Neo-Calvinism and the
Rise of Ascetic Protestantism
If we look back, from the point at which we have now arrived,
at this subject as a whole, the difference between primitive and
modem Calvinism becomes quite plain. Neo-Calvinism, with its
Free Church system, and its accompanying phenomena of democ-
racy and liberalism, as well as with the Pietistic Rigorism of
a strong self-controlled individualism, very utilitarian in secular
affairs, has moved very far away from the early aristocratic
Calvinism of the period of its foundation at Geneva, when it was
still close to Lutheranism. For that very reason, however, it
has become a great new social and ethical principle within
Christendom.
The Christian ethic here bears a quite different complexion
from its aspect in other confessions, particularly in Lutheranism.
In Lutheranism it was precisely the inwardness of the Christian
morality of love which demanded detachment from the external
affairs of the order of law and of the State ; further, it encouraged
the exclusion of competition and of the struggle for existence in
the professional guild organization, and from that point of view
recommended the individual to withdraw into inward happiness,
and in external matters to submit humbly to the existing aris-
tocratic organizations of life. Neo-Calvinism, on the other hand,
requires the Christian-Liberal organization of the State and of
Society, independence and freedom for the individual, equality
of opportunity as well as in the eyes of the law, the organization
of international peace, and the conquest of the struggle for exis-
tence by means of self-discipline and active social help through
associated effort. Only thus does it believe that the Christian
ideals of freedom and brotherly love can be realized, and thus
it appeals to the Bible as the great social text-book of humanity.
The patriarchal conservative elements of the Christian ethic have
receded, and the aspects of social reform and love of liberty have
come to the front . 431
Within Lutheranism and Calvinism, therefore, the Christian
ethic has developed in diametrically opposite directions. In German
Prussia, Lutheranism has become the support of the conservative,
aristocratic, legal positivist, and compulsory orthodoxy order
of life, and develops in its genuine adherents the Christian virtues
of an inwardness which is detached from the world, along
with those of submission, patience, reverence, kindly care
481 See p. 945.
PROTESTANTISM 689
for others, and conservative endurance. Calvinism, on the
contrary, has become a Christian intensification of the ideas
of democracy and liberalism, and it produces the virtues of
independence, love of liberty, love of humanity, and of Christian
social reform.
Both the chief elements of the earliest Christian ethic have been
divided between the two confessions, and in the process each has
been extraordinarily invigorated. Catholicism, on the other hand,
has remained until the present day a combination of both these
elements, and, as occasion arises, it emphasized sometimes the
democratic aspect of Natural Law, and sometimes its aristocratic
and patriarchal aspect, quite sure that it can prevent any conflict
between these tendencies by means of its central ecclesiastical
board of control, which is daily gaining more authority. Calvinism,
however, in its fundamental tendency towards as much of a
national Church as possible, and in its emphasis upon the in-
equality of mankind in all relationships which are not directly
religious, still remains inwardly aloof from the purely voluntary
Church-system, and from the equalitarian communistic ideas of
the strict sect, in spite of all the close connection between the
two. The individualism which is based upon predestination is,
and remains, different from the individualism which is supported
by the rationalistic Baptist doctrine of freedom.
Now, however, the last point is certainly not settled by merely
emphasizing the difference between Calvinism and the sects,
since it is precisely this difference which has become so much
less important in recent times. Calvinism has formally drawn
nearer to the sects. On the other hand, after the Baptists had
reorganized themselves into the Mennonite sect, all the other
sects which appeared later on were already more or less under
the influence of Calvinism. The Free Church principle and
Pietism have, moreover, permitted both the main groups to come
still closer to one another.
Only now is it possible to discern the position which Calvinism
occupies in the world at the present day, and its social signifi-
cance for civilization. Calvinism and the sect-group composed of
the Baptists, Methodists, and Salvationists to-day constitute a
religious unity which also represents a great sociological collective
type of Christian thought. It is supported mainly by the Anglo-
Saxon nations, but it is not confined to them, but is present in
all Calvinist countries. It has also had a very great influence
upon the religious and ethical thought and practice of contem-
porary Lutheranism, especially with the aid ofTPietism, which
vol. n. ft
690 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
arose from the same source, even although it is characteristically
different . 432
This fusion is based, on the one hand, on the fact that the
sect-idea which influenced Calvinism a good deal from the
outset became increasingly powerful as time went on, and finally
prevailed. The whole of this previous study proves the truth of
this statement. The sect-idea was only checked by the fact
that Calvinism positively accepted the world, and by its con-
ception of itself as an objective ecclesiastical institution, in spite
of all its Free Church tendencies.
The theological idea of predestination which originally dis-
tinguished Calvinism so clearly from the Baptist movement has
to a great extent receded, without the necessary disappearance
of the practical and ethical results which were derived from it.
The idea of sanctification which was bound up with that dogma
lived on independently, and led to the Free Church ideal with
a strict system of ethics. At this point, however, the development of
the sect came into touch with Calvinism ; this was due to the fact
that as the sects extended and settled down under tolerant State
conditions they became large national churches, and they then
either gave up or largely modified their attitude of separation
as “holy communities”, and their opposition to “the world” with
its political and economic conditions. The modern sects in par-
ticular, have been influenced by Calvinism from the very be-
ginning, and they are very different from the Waldensians and
the Baptists. Both groups agree in their emphasis upon the
voluntary principle, and upon a systematic ascetic strictness in
their way of life. Thus together they have developed into a force
which in contradistinction to the softer, more easygoing, and less
principled Lutheranism has been called “ascetic Protestantism”.
It might also be called the “individualistic Protestantism of
active-holiness”, if this description were not too cumbrous. From
the point of view of historical influence this “ascetic Protes-
tantism” is to-day the chief force in Protestantism, since it extends
its influence far beyond the genuinely Pietistic and ascetic circles
of “earnest” Christians. Along with mediaeval Catholicism it
constitutes the second great main type of Christian social doctrine,
432 This is a leading idea of Max Weber ; and also of Kuyper ; also see Knodt,
45-46, and Holl in the Calvinreden, p. 26. Held has noticed this also. P. 303:
“The working classes had long ago turned away from the aristocratic State
Church, and their religious needs were met especially by the sects, in which
the democratic spirit of Puritanism lived on in a modified form.” Finally, I
would refer the reader once more to Weber* s views on this question.
PROTESTANTISM
691
while the more subtle but weaker ideas of social doctrine in
mysticism, in spiritual idealism, in Lutheranism, and in philo-
sophical Neo-Protestantism are far behind it in historical influence.
While Catholicism had both the necessary complexity and
authority to embrace and to direct the whole of life, ascetic
Protestantism has the necessary hardness and flexibility, the
religious energy, and the matter-of-fact sobriety, the power to
adapt itself to the ethical ideas of the average man combined
with doctrinal simplicity, which likewise enable it, in its own way,
to dominate the whole of life ; and just as Catholicism was con-
nected with the general conditions of mediaeval life, so ascetic
Protestantism is connected with modern developments in the
political, economic, social, and technical spheres.
In order to understand this fully, however, it will be necessary
also to study the development of the sect-type within Protes-
tantism. In so doing we shall discover that mysticism and spiritual
idealism contain influences which have a vital effect upon the
social doctrines of all confessions. We shall note in particular the
significance of the transformation of the sect-type into great mass
communities, the development of their freedom within the sphere
of the tolerant modern State, and the adaptation of the sects
to the bourgeois social order. Since, however, in all this there
takes place that adjustment with Neo-Calvinism to which allusion
has already been made, the social doctrines of Neo-Calvinism
can only be presented in a conclusive manner in conjunction
with the social doctrines of the sects.
4. TttE SECT-TYPE AND MYSTICISM WITHIN PROTESTANTISM
Introduction
Lutheranism and Calvinism do not represent the whole of
Protestantism. In these two great confessions the Reformers were
able to work out their basic idea of the Church as an institution.
It was thus that they maintained their connection with the funda-
mental idea of the Early Church, and, above all, with mediaeval
Catholicism and its theory of a universal Church of the people,
dominating the whole of civilization. Other movements, how-
ever, of a sectarian and mystical type, constantly emerged along-
side of this mediaeval unity of Catholic civilization, and their
ideas had a most decided influence upon the thought of Catholi-
cism. The same phenomena appeared both within and alongside of
Protestantism. Thus, in addition to the institutional idea of the
692 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Church, Protestantism also developed the characteristic ideas of
the sects and of mysticism. Since these ideas originated in the
New Testament , 433 the emphasis laid on the New Testament by
Protestantism naturally gave a great impetus to these tendencies.
In Protestantism, however, the need to work out its own idea of
the Church as an institution, and its relation to an absolute,
objective, supreme truth of revelation, was felt to be a matter of
paramount concern ; the sectarian and mystical movements were
therefore thrust aside and forced to adopt an independent position.
However, in spite of ecclesiastical antagonism, both these move-
ments still remained in closest touch with the Protestant Churches,
and from the middle of the seventeenth century these ideals had
an increasing influence upon them. Reference has already been
made to the adjustment which took place between these ideals
and those of Calvinism. The reason for this is clear. From the
very beginning, indeed, the Protestant Reform movement had
been permeated by both these tendencies, and its opposition to
Catholicism was due, to a great extent, to the co-operation of
both these factors.
It was through mysticism that Luther first gained that personal
certainty of salvation in which he found that the ennobling and
overcoming power of grace was imparted, not through mechanical
sacraments which could not deliver from conviction of sin, but
through an inner spiritual experience. The strictness and purity
of Luther’s Scriptural attitude towards ethics made him place
the personal ethic of the Sermon on the Mount, and the doctrine
of the priesthood of all believers, in the forefront of his ethical
teaching. This meant that he had discarded the mediaeval doctrine
of the compromise between Nature and Supernature. He slrove
to find a new interpretation for the forms and values of the
natural life: thus, in his earlier period, Luther’s outlook was
often very similar to that of the sect-type.
Protestantism, however, did not attain its full independence,
combined with an ever-increasing hostility towards the sectarian
and mystical tendencies, until the following points had become
clear : first of all, men had to learn to base their hope of salvation
firmly and exclusively upon the objective assurance of the forgive-
ness of sins through the Death of Christ ; this led to concentration
of emphasis upon the inward appropriation of the forgiveness of
sins, directly offered from without; everything else followed
logically from this central fact of experience; on this objective
foundation the Protestant Church was firmly established, with
483 See p. 946*
PROTESTANTISM
693
power to mediate the certainty of redemption through the Word
and the Sacrament; the final stage of this process was reached
when the spiritual ethic of the Sermon on the Mount spread from
the Church outwards into the established forms of professional
and social life. 43 4
This separation between Church and Sect, however, did
not prevent the sectarian and mystical movements from feeling
themselves, to some extent at least, at home within Protestantism.
In point of fact, within Protestantism these sectarian and mystical
ideas have undergone a peculiar process of development, very
different from that of the older forms; they differ completely
from the development of the same ideas within the sphere of post-
Tridentine Catholicism.
At the close of the section on the Middle Ages the main charac-
teristics of the sect-type were indicated . 436 Here, therefore, it is
only necessary to bring out the connection between the Protestant
sects, or the Anabaptist movement, and the mediaeval sects ; we
also need to make clear the particular form which they now
developed within Protestantism.
The question of mysticism, however, needs different treatment.
It was, of course, mentioned incidentally in connection with the
later Middle Ages , 436 but its religious nature has not yet been
analysed, nor the religious-sociological character with which it is
connected. At that stage it was not necessary to go into the
question fully, for although even then mysticism was an important
factor for theology, for the philosophy of religion, for the history
of civilization and for psychology, the religious and sociological
peculiarities and results had scarcely begun to appear.
Mysticism meant the rise of a lay religion within the Church,
and it greatly encouraged the individualistic tendency of the
bourgeois world. But at that time it had no influence upon the
life of the religious community, nor had it yet any critical signifi-
cance in connection with the idea of the Church, or with doctrine.
Mysticism was still either under the protection of the Church, or
it was connected with the Religious Orders. It never stood alone.
Protestant mysticism, on the contrary, learnt to regard itself as
the outcome of the idea of the priesthood of all believers, and
of the personal religion of conviction, and thus it was able to
make an independent stand.
In studying this question our primary aim will be to make
clear the sociological results of these phenomena. As we
proceed it will become clear that they introduce into the history
484 See p. 947. 484 See above, pp. 328-343- m See abovc > PP- 37 ^ 377 -
694 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
of Christianity a principle which has to-day assumed a position
of paramount importance.
I. The Baptist Movement
and the Protestant Sects
The first question with which we have to deal is that of the
Protestant sect, or the Anabaptist movement. At an earlier stage
in this work we have shown that the sect-idea was deeply rooted
in the thought and creative activity of the great Reformers. Luther
made a distinction between the ethic of the Sermon on the
Mount, or the ethic of the individual, and the secular or official
ethic, or the ethic of the relative Natural Law of the fallen State.
He defined the former as the genuine Christian ethic. In so doing,
however, he was really only making concessions to the needs of
the national Church, necessities which God allowed to exist, but
which were actually due to the Fall . 437 Traces of the earlier idea
remained, however; it was never entirely hidden, but was only
obscured by the hollowness of orthodoxy. This is revealed by the
fact that at the outset of his career Luther had reckoned on the
influence of smaller groups of earnest Christians to leaven and
influence the general compulsory religion of the Territorial Church.
It was only the danger of subjectivism which caused these plans
to be set aside, and in the uniform Territorial Church of the
Visitations they were allowed to disappear . 438
The opposition within Protestantism has never ceased to appeal
to these statements which belong to Luther’s earlier days; they
are echoed again and again, from the days of the early Baptists
down to the time of the English Independents and the German
Pietists . 439
The sect-type has influenced Calvinism still more strongly,
though from a different point of view. Calvin adopted the sect-
ideal — the idea of the “holy community” — and also the sectarian
methods by which this ideal could be realized, such as excommuni-
cation and Church discipline, and he applied this ideal to a whole
territorial and national Church, instead of to small groups of
genuine Christians within the Church. The non-elect and the un-
believers were to be disciplined for the glory of God with the same
means which were to be used to develop and establish in the
elect a spirit of genuine spiritual piety. Thus in Calvinism the
sect-ideal of the holy community became the general ideal of
487 Cf. Hamack: Dogmengeschichte, III*, p. 004 : “That which was divided between
the cloister and the world in Catholicism the Reformers desired to unite in
common labour.” This, however, is simply “intramundane asceticism”.
488 See p. 947. 488 See p. 947.
PROTESTANTISM 695
national life and of civilization ; at a later stage the inner tension
which this produced shattered the solidarity of Calvinism.
It is not difficult to understand why the Protestant sect-type 440
extended its influence far beyond the measure permitted by the
ecclesiastical Reformation itself. An entirely natural factor in this
development was the influence of the Bible, including that of the
Sermon on the Mount, which could only be adapted with diffi-
culty to the compromise which the Reformers had achieved.
Again and again it was the direct influence of the Sermon on the
Mount which impelled people to form strict Christian communi-
ties, whose members wished to live according to this standard;
they then found it impossible to remain under the wing of a
national Church, and of a general civilized society. This pheno-
menon is all the more intelligible because both in thought, and
possibly also in organization, the religious life of that day was
already permeated with these ideas, due very largely to Walden-
sian or Bohemian influences. Thus the groups which held these
views saw in the Reformation simply the development of their
own programme, and in its victories the possibility of developing
a free, anti-hierarchical, and entirely lay religious movement.
General Characteristics of
the Baptist Movement
In fact, under the stimulus of the Reformation, on every hand
there sprang into existence an enormous number of small groups
of earnest Christians, living apart from “the world”, claiming
complete civil and religious freedom, whose main ideal was the
formation of religious communities composed of truly “converted”
persons, on a basis of voluntary membership. Their outward
symbol of membership was Adult Baptism, which implied the
voluntary principle. They rejected Infant Baptism, with its
implications of an all-inclusive, non-ethical basis of Church
membership. Another characteristic external sign was the demand
for Church discipline, and authority to excommunicate, which was
closely related to the demand for “a pure Church”. They did not
accept the ecclesiastical doctrine of the Sacrament. To them the
Lord’s Supper was mainly a festival of Christian fellowship, and
an expression of personal faith in Christ. Thus they were classed
with the “ Sakramenlierier ”.* Their real strength, however, lay in the
440 See p. 949.
* Luther’s epithet for those who denied the Real Presence of Christ in the
Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. He applied it particularly to men like
Zwingli, Karls tad t, Oecolampadius, Schwenkfeld, and others. — Trans-
lator’s Note.
696 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
emphasis which they gave to their desire to be a “holy com-
munity”, “holy” in the sense of the Sermon on the Mount, and
implying a voluntary community composed of mature Christians.
In practice this “holiness” was expressed in the following ways :
in detachment from the State, from all official positions, from
law, force, and the oath, and from war, violence, and capital
punishment; the quiet endurance of suffering and injustice as
their share in the Cross of Christ, the intimate social relationship
of the members with each other through care for the poor and
the provision of relief funds, so that within these groups no one
was allowed to beg or to starve ; strict control over the Church
members through the exercise of excommunication and congre-
gational discipline. Their form of worship was a simple service,
purely Scriptural in character, conducted by elected preachers
and pastors who had been ordained by the laying-on of hands,
and prayer by the synods representing the local groups . 441 They
also accepted the moral Law of Nature, but they opposed the
relative conception accepted by the Church, the compromise of
Natural Law with Original Sin. Like their mediaeval predecessors,
they interpreted the Law of Nature as the absolute Natural Law
of the Primitive State ; from this interpretation they sometimes
deduced conclusions which were as revolutionary as those pro-
claimed by the followers of Wyclif and Huss. In general, however,
they held that it was impossible to carry out the Natural Law, and
the Law of Christ with which they identified it, in the world,
because the world is of the devil, and is the scene of suffering and
endurance until the Advent of Christ, from which the faithful are
to prepare themselves by separation from it. Thus this movement
displays the main characteristics of the sect-type, with which our
previous study of the question has already made us familiar.
Origin of the Baptist Movement
Thus we can understand why some thinkers have even suggested
that perhaps these Baptist sects were merely a sign of the reappear-
ance of the mediaeval, Waldensian sect, made possible by the
Reformation. To that we must reply: (i) that we have no con-
clusive proof of the continued existence of any sect of this kind
as a uniform international organization, and (2) that there is no
evidence that the Baptist leaders came from these sectarian
circles. They were all the product of the religious movements of
the time; some were originally Lutheran, others Zwinglian or
Humanist, while some came from the ranks of the laity whose
441 See p. 951.
PROTESTANTISM
697
main interest was in the Bible. But in addition to the positive
characteristics which have just been indicated— the priesthood of
all believers, the central position of the Bible, and their emphasis
on personal religion — these movements also contained some
negative features — a spirit of criticism, of disappointment with
the Reformation, as well as a more thorough emphasis upon its
main ideas. This comes out in their emphasis upon Adult Baptism
(or rebaptism) as the motto of the new movement ; it comes out
still more clearly in the struggle against the moral sterility of
the great Churches of the Reformation, with their emphasis on
compulsion in religious matters, and in the bitter scorn which
the Baptist leaders pour upon the friendship of the Reformation
leaders with the world, and with royalty. These facts are familiar,
though their deeper significance is less generally recognized.
The situation thus created was only the outward expression of
the inward difficulty of the Reformation Churches. They had an
extremely high, almost Utopian ethical ideal. They had renounced
the Catholic system of stages, and had given up the hierarchical
authoritative direction of souls, but their great desire was to pene-
trate the whole mass of the population equally with the miracle
of the strict Christian ethic of love, and thus to make the life of
the world the direct organ of the love which religion inspires.
Lutheranism hoped to achieve this object entirely idealistically,
purely through confidence in the miraculous power of the Word ;
Calvinism, more practically, hoped to attain the same end by
means of an apparatus of control, based upon Scripture, and
founded by God. It is not surprising that this extreme idealism
was grievously disappointed, and that this practical reform did
not*succeed. In contrast with Catholicism the ideal was universal-
ized, deepened, and intensified, and Catholic methods of com-
pulsion were renounced. Thus, within the sphere of Lutheranism
in particular, a process of practical demoralization set in, which
was freely admitted by Luther and his companions ; down to the
present day Catholic controversialists make great capital out of
this fact . 442 Above all, it furnished the Baptist opposition parties
with plenty of material for criticism. Even in Geneva Calvinism
was unable to hold out for more than half a century at its highest
level. The deterioration of the Calvinist ideal is clearly visible in
that Puritanism which sank to the level of a self-righteous piety,
regarding material prosperity as the Divine reward of orthodoxy.
The more that practical and ethical achievement fell away from
the ideal, however, the more the churches, in true ecclesiastical
448 See p. 952.
698 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
fashion, concentrated upon the objective possession of salvation,
upon the Divine endowment which is entirely independent of a
righteousness achieved by good works. In Protestantism this
Divine endowment meant Scriptural doctrine, and the pre-
dominant position of the pure message in the ministry of the
Word. Thus the Protestant Churches fell a prey to an orthodoxy,
which, with its limitation to “the Word”, “pure doctrine”, and
the confession of faith, was much narrower and severer than
Catholic orthodoxy, which, indeed, finds salvation, not only in
correct dogmas, but in worship and in mystical devotion, that is,
in non-dogmatic imaginative elements. This emphasis on ortho-
doxy also led to a closer relationship with the civil authority,
which alone could secure, at least outwardly, the supremacy of
the true faith. This relation between the Protestant Church and
the civil authority naturally resulted in the whittling down of the
subtle Lutheran distinction between the real Christian ethic of love
and the secular ethic of Natural Law, till it was almost entirely
obliterated; this, of course, meant that morality itself became
secularized . 443 The problem of the relation of the Christian
ethic to war, authority, force, and law was soon no longer felt.
On the contrary, men boasted that it was one of the advantages
of the pure Reformed doctrine that it provided scope and a
Divine sanction for all these things, which would not be counten-
anced by monks or fanatics, with the natural assent of all the
opponents of Christ.
It was at this point that the Anabaptist movement arose. It
attacked the new theological dogmatism, the compulsory State
Church, and the tendency to secularization . 444 As a movement it
throve on opposition; it laid particular emphasis upon certain
elements which had originally formed part of the spiritual ideal
of the Reformers, which, however, under the stress of circum-
stances, had become merged in the idea of a national Church
which compromises with secular civilization. The Anabaptists
deliberately opposed the results of this compromise, and in so
doing they also opposed the whole idea of the Church, and of an
ecclesiastical civilization. This violent opposition, however, proves
that in reality it had been caused by the Reformation itself. This
is also proved by its apocalyptic-eschatological temper, an
element which we do not find in the earlier evangelical sects. On
443 The well-known books of Tholuck and Hundtshagen speak very plainly on
this point.
444 This point is brought out very plainly and vividly by the testimonies which
have been collected by Sebastian Franck , Schwenkfeld 9 and Gottfried Arnold .
PROTESTANTISM 699
this point the Anabaptist movement was in agreement with
Luther, who felt that he could only interpret such a collapse of
the whole ecclesiastical tradition from the point of view of the
approaching End of the World, and the coming Antichrist, who
had been proclaimed by prophecy.
To the Baptists, with their principle of small voluntary com-
munities, separate from the world, this attitude seemed quite
natural, for it was only possible to combine the idea of the world-
wide dominion of Christ with the break-up of Christendom into
small groups of this kind which separate themselves from the
degenerate Church of the people, on the assumption that the
great falling away of the masses, and the gathering up of Christen-
dom into a small group of believers, prophesied in the Apocalypse,
had already begun. It was only after these eschatological hopes
had been raised that certain individual groups proceeded to try
to erect the Heavenly Jerusalem by force. Further, in the excite-
ment caused by this expectation, they opened the door to mystical
and “enthusiastic” influences, which later on were forbidden by
the pure Baptists of the Mennonite persuasion ; these influences,
however, were also connected with the excitement created by the
Reformation, and in many ways they united with the various
mystical movements which branched off from it. All this was
alien to the true Waldensian movement, which proves that in the
Baptist movement we are dealing with a by-product of the
Reformation, which is closely connected with the Scriptural
purism and moral earnestness of the Reformation, but whose deep
inward opposition to the ecclesiastical idea of the Reformers is
also quite evident.
It is, however, probable, and even possible, that the wide
expansion of the Baptist movement was greatly assisted by some
lingering traces of the influence of the Waldensians and of other
sects; it is even possible that this fact alone provides the final
explanation of the growth of this movement. It is quite possible
also that here and there individual leaders may have been influ-
enced by traditions of this kind, in ways which we cannot now
trace . 445 The Reformation, however, and the opposition which
it aroused, certainly provoked the rise of this movement, and
helped to shape its course. At bottom, therefore, the whole
movement belonged to the Reformation. It was caused by the
Reformation; it appealed to its principles and ideals, and it
remained in closest touch with it ; Catholicism, on the contrary,
rejected this Anabaptist tendency entirely.
445 See p. 953.
700 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Catholic and Protestant Attitude
TOWARDS THE SECTS
Thus the history of the Christian Church presents us with this
strange spectacle, in which the very varied sect-movement, which
had formed the complement of Catholicism, was almost entirely
vanquished in the Catholic sphere, and then went over as a whole
into the Protestant camp. Tridentine Catholicism excluded the
unlimited possibilities of development which mediaeval Catholi-
cism had contained ; it became such a rigid centralized organiza-
tion that sect and fellowship movements could no longer exist
within its sphere. The motive which led to the formation of sects
naturally did not disappear suddenly from within Catholicism.
But they were diverted into the formation of new Orders and
ecclesiastical confraternities. Thus Tridentine Catholicism of the
Counter-Reformation experienced a new and brilliant period,
during which many new Orders were founded; since then,
however, the sect-impulse within the Catholic Church has died
out. The Bible was placed under the strict control of the Church,
and every kind of “fellowship 5 5 group was obliged to submit to
the ecclesiastical authority . 446 This has been the official Catholic
position ever since. The only development has been in the direc-
tion of increased rigidity.
The Protestant Church, however, with its strong emphasis
upon the Bible, its lack of hierarchical centralization, and the
possibility which it contains of continually offering fresh interpre-
tations of the Scriptures, from that time forward provided a fruitful
soil for the sect-movement. It is true that at first the Protestant
Church persecuted and suppressed this movement as cruelly and
violently as the Catholic Church had done; but the Protestant
movement was unable to eradicate the principle completely,
because it contained within itself the elements of this principle.
Hence new sects arose continually out of the ashes of the perse-
cuted movements. It is the combination of all these factors which
explains the peculiarly complicated position of the sect-movement
in relation to Lutheranism and Calvinism.
In its austere ideal of detachment from the world, and its
emphasis upon good works, the sect-type is more adapted to
Catholicism; for monasticism bears a certain resemblance to it,
and the monastic life itself, to some extent at least, acknowledges
the sect-ideal. On the other hand, the sect-type, in its insistence
448 Cf. Gothein: Staat und Gesellschaft des Zeitalters der Gegenreformation, pp. 139-145 ,
161-176 .
PROTESTANTISM 701
on the necessity for judging everything by the standard of the
Bible, on personal “assurance”, and on ecclesiastical liberty, is
really more at home within Protestantism. Finally, also the sect-
type completely accepted the Protestant doctrine of grace and the
idea of the “calling”.
At bottom, however, this complicated relationship is not
difficult to understand. Both in Catholicism and in Protestantism
the sect-idea arose out of fundamental primitive Christianity,
but in each case its form of expression was entirely different.
Catholicism controlled this tendency by allowing it to express
itself in the formation of new Religious Orders and confraternities,
and, in the end, it stamped out every trace of an independent sect-
movement. The Protestant attempt to destroy the sect-movement
was, however, unsuccessful. At first it merely tolerated its exist-
ence outside the Protestant Churches, in the form of Dissent.
Finally, however, in the form of Pietism, it incorporated the
sect-movement into its own life.
Catholicism was more pliable and ready to compromise. Just
as in its graded ethical system it accepted secular civilization, and
at that particular point in history in the Tridentine Reform
absorbed the Renaissance most thoroughly, so also in an equally
adaptable manner it assimilated the sect-idea through its new
Orders and Confraternities. On the other hand, however, so far
as it could, it annihilated every sectarian or cultural movement
which attempted to maintain an independent existence.
Protestantism was simpler, narrower, and more Scriptural,
and therefore it rejected both non-ecclesiastical culture and the
sect-movement. But its unchangeable principle of personal
otnviction and “assurance”, and its emphasis upon Scriptural
purity, led it in the end to tolerate the sect-movement as an
independent phenomenon. The relationship between the two,
however, was so close and intimate that official Protestantism was
deeply affected by the influence of the sect-ideal ; this, again, led
to a wealth of development, compared with which the elastic
Catholic synthesis seems hard and narrow.
In the last resort, however, the sect is a phenomenon which
differs equally from the ecclesiastical spirit of Protestantism and
of Catholicism. It is an independent branch of Christian thought;
it is the complement of the Church-type, and it is based upon
certain elements in the New Testament ideal. The great national
churches represented both the idea of grace, and that of a
common spirit which produces individual souls, and thus they
also assimilated into their own life the presuppositions of civiliza-
702 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
tion in general. For them the main question was this : how could
they gain an influence over the masses? Salvation and grace are
as independent of the measure of subjective realization of strict
ethical standards as they are pliable in adjusting themselves to
the institutions of Natural Law, institutions which have become
necessary through sin, which have a healing and disciplinary
effect, but they certainly cannot really be called Christian. This
adaptation to the institutions based on Natural Law turns the
Christian ethic into a compromise which, in one way or another,
accepts the world . 447 Thus, from the point of view of their influ-
ence upon world history, the great national churches formed the
main expression of Christian thought; they are great historic
powers, under whose influence the Christian ethic has been
carried forward and developed. They were the first great result
of the world mission of the Primitive Church. Once they were
firmly established, however, they provided both the material and
the occasion for the play of forces, through which there was
introduced the critical and hostile element of an individualistic
form of Christian piety, severely ethical in the Primitive Christian
sense, which did not believe in a mass religion at all. This criticism,
however, contained a fundamental element of the genuine ethic
of Primitive Christianity. Under its influence there arose small
groups of earnest souls who judged the life of the world by the
high ethical standard of the Gospel. Their sociological expression
naturally took the form of a society of persons united by a deep
common personal conviction, who were entirely opposed to the
ecclesiastical system, with its inclusive character, and its claim to
be the sole depository of grace. This development took place within
all the Christian churches, because in them all, along with the
Bible, and the endowment of grace, the germ of the sect-type was
latent. This seed of the sect-type developed along different lines
within the different churches, but the end attained was the same.
Within Catholicism its main form of expression was detachment
from the world, realized in practice on the higher moral level of
monasticism ; within Protestantism it expressed itself in an indi-
vidualistic and subjective method of interpreting the Scriptures,
and in its emphasis upon the attainment of salvation without
priesthood or hierarchy. There is no doubt that Protestantism has
proved the more fruitful soil for the growth of the sect-idea. The
whole course of Protestant development has been accompanied
by and carried through with the aid of a powerful sect-movement.
The extraordinary sociological consequences of this development
447 See p. 953.
PROTESTANTISM 7 o 3
of the sect-type within Protestantism have already been shown
by its influence upon Calvinism, and in this chapter this will
become still more evident.
Space forbids me to give a detailed presentation of the sect-
movement at this point; all I can do is to mention the salient
features, and to outline the general course of the movement, in
the same way as this subject was handled in connection with the
Middle Ages.
Anabaptists at Zurich,
and First Extension of the Movement
The Anabaptist movement broke out in 1525, in Zurich, in
radical Reform circles, to whom Zwingli’s application of the
principles of Scripture seemed inadequate. The following were
its main characteristics : emphasis on Believers’ Baptism, a
voluntary church, the precepts of the Sermon on the Mount, the
rejection of the oath, of war, law, and authority, and, finally, the
most far-reaching mutual material help, and the equality of all
Church members, the election of elders and preachers by the
local congregations, and, to a large extent, the unpaid character
of the pastoral office; these principles were in close agreement
with the democratic tendencies of the masses. In the main, the
whole movement sprang from the lower classes ; primarily it was
recruited from the ranks of the manual labourers, miners, and
similar groups. Its leaders were mostly trained pastors, whose
main concern at first was with the literal application of the Word
to existing conditions, and with questions of Church discipline.
As.time went on, however, they learned how to appeal to the
democratic instincts of the masses.
The first demands of the peasants were moderate enough, and
(probably quite rightly) they have been connected with their
doctrines, in so far as they referred to the restoration of the law
of Christ and of the apostolic Church. The later radicalism of the
Peasants’ Revolt, however, was connected with the Hussite and
Taborite ideas of the absolute law of God and of Nature, and not
with the ideas of the persecuted Baptists. 448 The moderate Baptists,
however, who suffered patiently for their convictions, constituted
448 On this point look up the article entitled Bauernkneg by Sommerlad in Schiele s
Lexikon . He rightly emphasizes the Natural Law in its absolute Taborite
significance and connects the radical demands with Hussitism. Tx*e moderate
early demands of the Twelve Articles are connected by Berens: The Digger
Movement with the Anabaptist movement ; Stolze: Z ur Vorgeschichte des Bauer nr
krieges, igo8, calls the Baptist Hubmeier one of the authors.
704 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the main body of the movement. Rioting and violence had no
place in their programme. It was only the Moravian groups,
under the leadership of Hut, which practised communism,
refused to recognize any “man-made law”, and abandoned
themselves to a Chiliasm of the Joachimite type.
From Zurich the movement spread with great swiftness and
intensity : everywhere it attracted to itself all who were dissatisfied
with the Reformation, as well as a remnant formed of members of
the earlier mediaeval evangelical groups. The whole of Central
Europe was soon covered with a network of Anabaptist communi-
ties, loosely connected with each other, who all practised a strictly
Scriptural form of worship. The chief centres were in Augsburg,
Moravia, and Strassburg, and, later on, in Friesland and the
Netherlands.
The whole movement was an early premature triumph of the
sectarian principles of the Free Churches.
This whole principle, however — apart from the Anabaptists’
objection to all forms of official connection with government and
the administration of justice — was so harshly opposed to the
still dominant mediaeval idea of a social order expressed in a
State Church that Catholics and Protestants alike could see in it
nothing less than the destruction of the very basis of Society itself.
Hence the response of the official Churches to the movement was
a horrible and sanguinary persecution. First of all, the leaders of
the movement were taken and put to death. Some were burned
alive ; some were slain by the sword ; others were drowned. Then
came the turn of the masses, who were decimated with savage
cruelty. 449
Before 1526, while the ecclesiastical conditions in some places
were still most unsettled, individual Baptist groups began to
organize their own religious system on an independent basis ; with
all the unlimited possibilities of ecclesiastical organization which
seemed to be opening out in many directions, it looked as though
there were a sphere and a future for the Anabaptist movement.
For that very reason, however, the ecclesiastical authorities
brought this provisional period to an end as quickly as possible;
they resolutely manufactured an ecclesiastical unity from above,
since it did not arise spontaneously from below, through the
power of the Spirit. Only where a positive organization of this
449 Cf. the negotiations of Philip of Hess about the policy to be adopted with
regard to the Anabaptists in Hochkuth: £./. hist . Theol. Only the Landgrave is
in favour of a relatively humane policy, but he cannot carry it through against
the men of order who want to “preserve the State and Society”.
PROTESTANTISM 705
kind was still impossible, as, for instance, in the Netherlands
before 1572, did the Baptist movement prolong its existence. Here
it finally attained a permanent, though limited, possibility of life.
Everywhere else persecution was dominant. This terrible pressure
of persecution then drove the Baptist communities into an excited
Revivalism and Chiliasm, and thus some fanatics in the Nether-
lands (just as the Taborites had done at an earlier date), came to
the conclusion that the Last Days were at hand, and that they
were justified in attempting to set up the Heavenly Jerusalem by
force. They based their argument upon the example of the Old
Testament and the Apocalypse. This led to the horrors of Munster,
which was a disaster for the whole movement, and only made their
persecutors feel still more sure that their oppressive attitude was
justifiable and right.
The Mennonites
Out of the confusion which ensued, Menno Simons gathered the
Anabaptists into a peaceful evangelical community; he excluded
the Taborite-Joachimite type of fanatic, and gave the leading
position in the movement to the Zurich section, which had been
in the majority from the outset ; at the same time he appealed to
the example of the mediaeval evangelical sects. The following
were to be the general lines of organization : each group was to be
controlled by the spirit of the Sermon on the Mount, with power
to excommunicate and discipline its members ; Church members
were all to be considered equal; the leaders in the community
were to be openly elected to office, otherwise remaining in civil
life. The taking of oaths, participation in war and in the adminis-
tration of justice, were still forbidden. Great stress was laid on
separation from all non-Baptist Christians ; this went so far as to
demand that a marriage should be dissolved in which the husband
or the wife had been either excommunicated or convicted of
unbelief.
Conditions in the Netherlands, where each individual State
organized its Church system independently, and on different lines,
gave the Mennonite Baptists the right to a bare existence, although
they had no civil rights, and had to endure much oppressive
treatment from orthodox Calvinism. Finally, under the influence
of the surrounding Calvinism, to an even greater extent they have
adopted the Protestant ethic of the “calling”, and from this stand-
point they have learned, not merely to tolerate the State, law
and public life, but they themselves have become part of its life.
In time of war they made their contribution to the State through
VOL. 11. R
706 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the taxes, and in return they were granted full civil rights. They
became bourgeois, prosperous, and wealthy. When, after 1650,
the radical element reappeared, they rightly condemned these
Baptists for compromising with the world. 450
Even then, however, the Baptist movement was unable to create
a uniform organization. It split up into various Free Church
groups, large and small. The Baptists of Friesland and Waterland
were inclined to assert the independence of the individual congre-
gation ; they also laid a good deal of emphasis upon individual
freedom in general. This attitude was opposed to the spirit of
those groups which were administratively centralized, and which
exercised a strict Church discipline. From this centre the spirit of
independence spread through the whole Baptist movement, till at
last it either did away altogether with the system of Church
government by a supreme Board of Elders, or, at least, it limited
their powers to such an extent that, in the end, they became merely
nominal. 451
English Baptists, and the
Rise of the General Baptists
The next important development of the Baptist movement took
place in England. It had been introduced into that country about
the year 1530 by the masses of Dutch emigrants who joined forces
with the aftermath of the Lollard movement. At first they were of
the Chiliastic Hofmann type, but later on they became Mennon-
ites. Here also they were cruelly persecuted as “Separatists” and
enemies of the social order. In spite of all these difficulties, how-
ever, they maintained their existence until the period of the
English Revolution, when we shall hear more about them.
On the other hand, from England there went forth influences
which helped to draw Pietistic Calvinism into closer contact with
the Baptist movement. We have seen already that the same
phenomenon occurred in connection with Congregationalism,
but in this instance the contact was far closer. About 1602 a
certain John Smyth founded a Congregational church at Gains-
borough ; it was from this congregation that there arose the great
Church of the General Baptists, which to-day has spread into
450 See p. 953.
451 Ten Cate , Gemeente of oudsten souverein? Doopgezinde Bijdragen , 46, 1906, pp. 141-
151 : “Bij een karakteristiek van de innerlijke ontwikkeling der gemeenten van
hun ortstaan c. 1650, mag deze trek van overgang der suvereiniteit uit de
handen der oudsten in die der gemeente niet worden vergeten : De oudsten
verloren hunne macht en te gemeende ontwikkelde zich tot een geheel
democratische independente ins telling” (p. 5/).
PROTESTANTISM
707
many parts of the world. At first the basis was Puritan and
Calvinistic; but while Browne and Robinson developed their
Congregationalism on very similar lines to the Independency of
the Baptists, without accepting the specific Baptist doctrines,
Smyth, who took his congregation to Amsterdam, and settled
there as a Refugee Church, was drawn farther and farther into
the Baptist way of thinking. Finally he acknowledged Believers’
Baptism as the logical result of Separatism and the “holy com-
munity”. He baptized himself, and then the members of his
church, and thus re-established the church as a Baptist congrega-
tion. Then he openly declared his connection with the Baptists
and the Mennonites, and joined that body. One section of his con-
gregation, in spite of a fraternal relationship with the Mennonites,
did not agree to the fusion of the two elements and, under the
guidance of Helwys and Murton, its members returned to England
in 1611. It was there that their church became the mother of
the great Church of the General Baptists. The main features of
this Church are these: it rejects the doctrine of predestination,
demands separation between Church and State, establishes
Church fellowship upon a voluntary basis, ethical and spiritual
fitness, and upon baptism by immersion; it renounces the dog-
matic errors of the early Baptists, permits its members to swear in
a court of law, to take part in war, and to take official positions
under the State for the purposes of citizenship ; it rejects com-
munism, and desires to be a corporation which includes all
classes without any social distinctions whatsoever. 452 Otherwise
this Church maintained its connection with the Baptists of the
Reformation period, although, on account of their historic origin
and their permanent environment, they became strongly impreg-
nated with the spirit of Calvinism. Throughout the confused
period of the English Revolution they maintained a precarious
existence ; since then, in England, America, and on the Continent,
they have developed into a large body. 453 In reality all that they
have retained of the original Baptist spirit is the Free Church
principle of membership on a voluntary basis, and the require-
ments of moral discipline; otherwise, however, they have gone
far beyond Menno Simons, and have accepted the general Pro-
482 Newman, p. 392. For “spiritualist” features in Smyth’s original programme,
and which the original Congregationalists with whom he was closely connected
decidedly rejected, see Barclay , 106-109 ; such features are always more likely
to occur among the Baptists than among people who wield dogmatic authority.
Yet he desired to be connected with the external Word as the means of th£
Spirit, the affirmation of the moral law of the Bible, and strict order in the
Church, 458 See p. 953.
708 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
testant ethic of “the calling”, together with the recognition of
the State, of law, and of economic life. They have thus severed
their exclusive connection with the lower classes and have gained
adherents from the most varied ranks of Society. To-day it is more
accurate to speak of Baptist “Free Churches” than of Baptist
“sects”. The persecuted Baptist movement with its patience and
hope, in ways which had already been prepared by Menno
Simons, thus made its peace with the world, very much along the
same lines as the Protestant churches of other confessions had
done. The only original elements which remained were: the
voluntary principle of Church membership, a strict morality, and
a very thorough individualism, which — like the individualism of
the Congregationalists and Independents (which had been pro-
duced by Calvinism) with which it was closely related in religion,
and also in positive historical ways — affected the whole of the
political and social life of America, as well as that of the English
middle classes, and united itself also with other impulses which
were moving in this direction.
The radical Baptist element, however, had not died out. It
renewed its vigour at the time of the English Revolution. In an
earlier section of this book we have seen how Congregationalists
imitated the Baptists in their Church constitution, and how the
Cromwellian Puritans and Independents, with their enthusiasm
for lay-preaching and their aloofness from Church organization,
also represented Baptist principles; all these factors then united,
to the advantage of the Baptists and the Quakers among others.
The chief characteristics of these Independents, however, were a
greater emphasis upon the more spiritual and Pietist elements on
the one hand, and, on the other hand, upon the Calvinist, Puritan,
and theocratic elements. The peculiar feature of this Cromwellian
Independency consisted precisely in that union of the toleration
of a free Protestant Church organization, with a strict surveillance
of Christian morals, combined with the right to carry on a Holy
War for the cause of God, and with the inauguration of a Christian-
civic commonwealth. Its connection with the Baptist movement
lay rather in the Baptist ideals which were generally accepted by
Calvinism, and in the explicit freedom of Church organization
than in the characteristic Baptist radicalism of a new building
up of the Kingdom of God upon the ruins of secular and civil
organization. The radical Baptist spirit, however, was very much
alive in Harrison and his followers, and it was increased by the
newly revived Chiliasm.
In the army, Harrison’s regiment formed the real focus for the
PROTESTANTISM 709
sectarians, while Cromwell’s regiments were the seat of Puritanism.
In the Barebones Parliament, moreover, Harrison and his followers
wanted to set aside all law and all courts of law, in order to
prepare a people, freed from all secular ties, for the Advent of
Christ; indeed, many of them attacked the idea of private pro-
perty, and they wished to break up the Church organization
altogether by abolishing its financial foundation— -the tithing
system ; all earthly authority was to be destroyed in order to make
room for the Heavenly King and the coming Kingdom of God.
It is difficult to judge to what extent these ideas were accepted by
the nation and by the army, and how far they are a real link
with the original Baptist and Sectarian radicalism. At any rate,
we know that the literature of the early Baptists was widely read.
In his Holy War no less a person than Bunyan had before his
eyes the ideal of Munster, while his Pilgrim's Pt ogress is connected
with the story of Tobias in the Wanderings of Hendrik Niclaes .
In the Barebones Parliament both groups came into conflict, and
the dissolution of the Parliament of “saints” was the expression
of the painful separation of Cromwell from his old companions.
This radical sectarianism finally made it impossible for the work
of Parliament to continue, although otherwise it had rendered
signal public service by earnest political work. It split into two
groups: a moderate majority for Cromwell, and a fanatically
advanced minority for Harrison; it therefore resigned its com-
mission into Cromwell’s hands. From that time forward the
radical “saints” were the opponents of Cromwell; they threw in
their lot with the popular democratic movements, which, in this
general breakdown of previous conditions, now came to the fore.
This turn of events, however, threw the republic between the
Scylla of dictatorial authority and the Charybdis of doctrinaire
fanaticism. Men of energy and political responsibility like General
Monk did not hesitate about their course of action ; they decided
to join the moderate party, under Cromwell, and, as usually
happens, the masses followed suit. This ended the last great period
of Baptist revolt, which, however, had only been able to reach
this point in the wake of the Independent movement, which was
more Puritan than Baptist in its outlook. This advanced sectarian-
ism was the last politically important wave of Chiliasm, the last
return of the spirit of the Hussites and of the Peasants’ Wars, the
last attempt by Christian social reformers to prepare the way for
the Kingdom of God in the world by means of the sword . 454
454 See p. 953.
7io THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Radical Baptists and the
English Revolution: the “Levellers”
In the last years of the Civil War, and above all after Cromweirs
“apostasy”, certain groups emerged which bore Baptist character-
istics with the addition of some peculiarities of their own. In the
unsettled state of affairs, and in the widespread attitude of
“spiritual” indifference to forms of worship and to organization,
there were now no longer any groups with particular forms of
worship; these groups had all become politico-social parties;
they, however, display all the more plainly the politico-social
conclusions drawn from the religious idea as such. The largest and
most important group was that of the “Levellers”. These men
had strong political interests, and set themselves in opposition
to the leaders of the army, but they also based their claims on
religious grounds. They represent that current of thought which
believes in the radical Law of Nature, of God, and of Christ,
which will allow no compromise with the institutions corrupted by
sin, but which desires to realize the Christian social and political
ideal throughout Society, from top to bottom. Their leader,
John Lilburn, came from Puritan circles ; he had been a victim
of the Star Chamber and an exile in Holland, and later an officer
in the Parliamentarian army. He then fell out with the Parliament,
inflamed the army by his agitation, and induced the soldiers to
assent to the famous proposals to the Commons and to Parliament
which are known as the Agreements of the People. The leading
feature of this movement was the demand for complete separation
between Church and State, deduced logically from the standpbint
of a “Spiritual” Christianity, and the division of the Church into
free, self-supporting ^congregations ; it also included the ideal of a
radical democracy, based on the facts of Christian equality and the
freedom of the redeemed. The demand was not for equality in
possessions, but for full equality before the law, and for a real
share of the whole people, so far as it is really Christian and
religious, in the work of government; it was also felt that the
system of law needed to be simplified, and the practice of capital
punishment restricted. In this sense Jesus was the first “Leveller”.
Forced back by the opposition of the generals, and finally by the
Protectorate of Cromwell, they became a passionately hostile
opposition partly, which did not hesitate to encourage con-
spiracies and attempts at assassination, and even union with
the Royalists, until finally they were forcibly suppressed. John
PROTESTANTISM 7 n
Lilburn himself ultimately found a refuge in the quiet haven of
Quakerism . 455
The “Diggers”
The Socialists and Communists of the Revolution were much
less influential. While the “Levellers” based their arguments for
political freedom on religious premises, in the common interest
of the radical middle class and of the workers, these socialist
groups represented the interests of the rural proletariat, which
also hoped to gain its rights and a reward for its sacrifices in the
Civil War by means of the Kingdom of the “Saints”. The move-
ment did not spread beyond the agricultural workers, for, at that
period, there was scarcely an industrial proletariat worth the
name. They called themselves the “Diggers”; they formed a
small group organized on communistic lines, and held that it
was their Christian duty to place common land and crown pro-
perty under spade and ploughshare.
Their spokesman was Gerard Winstanley, from whom there
has come down a pamphlet dedicated to Cromwell, and entitled
The Law of Freedom , which contains a programme of Christian
Social Reform. Many of his other writings have also been pre-
served. Originally Winstanley had been a purely “spiritual”
man on the lines of Hans Denk, Sebastian Franck, and the
Familists. But this Christian-Social ideal, which he upheld as
the logical result of this spirituality of the Inner Light and of the
Indwelling Eternal Christ, which is in harmony with the creative
Divine Reason, is the ancient sect-ideal of the Absolute Natural
Law, as it was before the Fall, the ideal of freedom, equality, and
brofherhood, which only recognized the use of law, force, and
dominion in so far as those things are permitted by the full
consent of all the individual members of Society, and as they
freely serve the common good. All historic law which goes beyond
that, all that the Church and the monarchical and aristocratic
principle exalt as the relative Natural Law, which has been
instituted by the Fall, is a product of the flesh, of selfishness and
externalism ; it has only been glossed over with complicated argu-
ments, by the false theology of priests and professors in the
interests of a particular class. Christ, the Inner Light, Reason, the
absolute Natural Law : it all means the same thing. The victory
of Christ, now, in England, means that a new era has begun; and
this message ought to be carried over to the Continent as well.
This Christian Natural Law is to be carried through, first of all,
485 See p. 955.
712 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
by the cession of the common land, and of the estates which have
no masters, to be worked by the poor and needy as a communistic
experiment. The family and the private household are to be re-
tained. The whole scheme is to be realized without the use offeree.
The “older brethren”, as they called the landowners and
capitalists, are to remain in possession of their property and
income ; only the land which has become free shall be entrusted to
the “younger brethren”, i.e. to those who have no capital. The
Spirit must then carry through the new order Himself. Winstanley
conceived this new order as an absolutely democratic society, to be
ruled by elected officials changing every year, from which he
excluded money, hire, and the exploitation of labour. The
example of the law of Israel, spiritually interpreted, was in
his mind throughout. Finally, he placed this choice before
Cromwell : either to set up the new order and thus to remain a
true Christian, or merely to continue the old order under a new
name, and in so doing to betray the indwelling Christ.
Winstanley’s ideas form an anticipation of theories on the
subject of property, similar to those propounded by Locke at a
later period, and they foreshadow a reform of the land laws like
that of Henry George to-day. At first, however, these ideas had
no effect at all, since the next development was in the exactly
opposite direction, and brought about the break-up of property
held in common, and the dispossession of the free peasants in
favour of the Enclosures.
Shortly after Winstanley’s death, there appeared in London in
the year 1659 two pamphlets by a Dutchman, Peter Cornelius
Plockboy, who belonged to the moderate Baptist movement.
Stimulated by the Moravian Baptists, and perhaps also by* the
Labadists, he drew up a programme for a co-operative society
on Christian principles, organized in the grand style; in this he
hoped to force the bourgeois element to imitate him. We do not
know whether these ideas bore any practical fruit or not. Win-
stanley’s ideas, however, influenced the Quaker Bcllers; he in
turn influenced Richard Owen ; thus there is a direct connection
between Winstanley and modern Socialism. He himself, however,
disillusioned in the same way as Lilburn, finally found a home
among the Quakers, together with many of his followers. 456
The Millennarians
The closest connection with the radical Baptist movement was
maintained by the Millennarians. This party taught that the four
456 See p. 956.
PROTESTANTISM
7i3
world-empires of the Book of Daniel, familiar to students of the
ecclesiastical philosophy of history, covered the whole intervening
period, down to the Protectorate of Cromwell; when it broke
down they expected the Fifth World Empire of the full dominion
of Christ. They looked for the Advent of Christ, and for the
setting up of the true Kingdom of the “Saints”, without priest or
sacrament, law or oath, king or government, for the kingdom of
the complete Christian anarchy of love. Some waited for this
future in quiet patience, and endured the world ; others, like the
Taborites and Mtinsterites, became violent revolutionaries.
The genuine religious fanatics belonged to this section. Their
spirit dominated the Left Wing of the Barebones Parliament, and
made it impossible for Cromwell to govern through it. They were
a real danger to the Protectorate. A smaller group composed of
quieter people, split off from the main body of the party. This
section was led by a certain John Pordage, who adopted mystical
and ascetic ideas. In his teaching, the “Kingdom of the Saints”
was spiritualized into a Philadelphian society, very much on the
lines of the later Quakers and the Labadists. Many, however,
maintained an attitude of bitter hostility to Cromwell.
The radical Baptists were closely connected with the Millen-
narians. They were strongly represented in the Irish Army, and
they greatly desired to choose an Anabaptist general to lead
them; in the end Monk cleared them all out of the Army. At the
Restoration, these Chiliasts were the only people who could not
accept the new order, or who went over to the Pietistic groups.
They made an attempt at resistance which was defeated with
bloodshed. Their leader, Harrison, died in the conviction that
he would soon come again at the right Hand of Christ, at the
setting up of His Kingdom. From that time forward the revolu-
tionary Baptist movement was over . 457
The other religious groups which arose during the Revolution
belonged to the mystical spiritual movement, and will be men-
tioned later in that connection. The Quaker sect, however, in
which all these religious tendencies finally merged, was a curious
blend of sectarianism and spiritual religion. For that reason it also
will be described later.
In this section I only wish to emphasize the sectarian element
which played a very distinct part in the Great Rebellion, in the
same way as in the previous chapter I was obliged to lay stress
on the Scottish and Huguenot element within Calvinism. All
that went beyond the sectarian element which I have just described
457 For the Fifth Monarchy men, see Gooch , 260-267 , 324 and Glass.
714 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
belonged to the sphere where fanaticism was rife. These move-
ments were characterized by mystical ideas and experiences, a
great belief in “spiritual religion”, and, above all, by that “ad-
vanced” interpretation of the Law of Nature which belongs to
the aggressive Chiliasm of the Anabaptist movement. This last
element in the extremely complicated movement belongs to the
subject of our present inquiry. It was not the dominant factor, but
it left abiding traces of its influence. Here, as always, the first result
of idealistic radicalism was merely to prepare the way for reaction.
Nevertheless the movement had a permanent influence. Indirectly,
through its connection with Puritan Independency, and directly,
through these radical groups, it was the influence of the Baptist
movement which helped to loosen the connection between
Church and State, which made the formation of Free Churches
possible, and which helped to Christianize the ethical and social
interests of the English people apart from dogmatic compulsion.
All this took place in an atmosphere of Utopian fanaticism, but
in the next generation it became a moderate political and eco-
nomic programme. It was the last time that a political and social
revolution was carried through in the name of Christ, but it was
to these Christian ideas that it owed a great part of its power,
and only through them has it been introduced, in its secularized
form, into the modern world. Here we see very clearly the
significance of the Christian outlook on life, expressed in the
terms of the sect-type, not merely in the history of the Church
and of religion, but also in the sphere of political and social
questions . 458
Pietism
The sectarian energies which were released in the English
Revolution were connected with the Pietist and Puritan form of
English Calvinism. As we have already seen, this element was
also one of the factors in Continental Calvinism. Although this
movement had a quieter and less eventful history than its English
counterpart, it too had its Left Wing, which developed here and
there into sects of the extremist type ; the whole movement also
spread into Lutheranism. At this point it is customary to gather
up all these phenomena under the term “Pietism”.
Generally speaking, Pietism simply represents the sect-ideal
within the churches, restricted and controlled by the fundamental
thought of the Church. It reappears continually throughout the
history of the Church. Its characteristics do not vary: always
458 See p. 956.
PROTESTANTISM
7i5
there is the same insistence on the New Testament law of morals
and on the idea of the Kingdom of God, and the same opposition
to all externalism in the ecclesiastical sacramental system. In this
sense, like the sect-ideal itself, Pietism belongs to all the churches.
At that time (i.e. the seventeenth century), for similar reasons,
Catholicism also had its own Pietist movement in the shape of
Jansenism. But Catholicism can only tolerate that kind of move-
ment if it is properly controlled by the Church as an Order or a
Confraternity, so Jansenism was completely crushed. The corre-
sponding movements within Calvinism we know already as
Puritanism and “Precisianism”.
Pietism, however, did not remain within the churches; every-
where it took the further step which led to separation and to the
formation of sects. In the Netherlands this sectarian development
began with Labadism ; in England its new phase of development
was ushered in by Methodism. The same phenomena also ap-
peared within Lutheranism; and they came into touch with
Calvinistic movements of the same kind; this intercourse has
gradually become more intimate and vital, and is still a real
force at the present day. In this later English and Continental
Pietism, however, the whole movement does not come to a head
in a process which influences the history of the world — the
destruction of an old system of government and the erection of a
new system — as was the case in the English Revolution. In that
particular instance the religious movement was set, by the course
of events, at the very heart of the political and social conflict;
that explains the overwhelming force of an upheaval in which a
Christian nation actually beheaded a king.
Continental Pietism was not connected with any great events
of this time. That is why it remains, especially in Germany, more
of a party matter — almost a hole-and-corner affair — which is
limited to theological and ecclesiastical circles, and becomes, in
the main, tame and colourless. It is true that it displays a great
deal of genuine, warm, and self-sacrificing piety, but it also displays
that pettiness of religious groups which compensates for their
detachment from the world by a still more thorough spiritual
pride ; affecting to despise worldly influence, they strive to attain
it by personal scheming and intrigue, and they give vent to their
passions in all kinds of religious bickerings, thus revealing exactly
the same characteristics as the darker side of the Baptist move-
ment.
In Germany, when the country had recovered from the Thirty
Years War, there arose a reaction against the popular religion
7x6 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
of the Territorial Churches, which had become formal in their
officialism and rigid in their orthodoxy, while morally they were
far too indifferent. The leader of this movement was Spener,
who, in addition to his emphasis upon Luther’s earlier idea of
forming small groups of “earnest Christians” within the Church
at large, had also been deeply influenced by the Pietism of
England and Holland.
One of his main innovations was the introduction of the con-
venticle system which he had seen at work in England and in
Holland. By this method he hoped to achieve that spiritual and
ethical reform of the Church which was needed as the complement
of the reform in doctrine which had already been carried out so
thoroughly. It was his intention, however, to keep this movement
entirely within the life of the Church. But its “Perfectionist” aim
of separating “converted” Christians, that is, of mature and
conscious Christians, from the rest, in order to form them into
smaller groups of real Christians, its stress on the need for “con-
verted” preachers, its emphasis upon lay religion and upon the
pure apostolic primitive Church, revealed a spirit which was still
inwardly hostile to the spirit of ecclesiasticism. Spener also held
that the greatest impulse towards reform lay in the idea of the
coming Kingdom of God, and the approaching world trans-
formation.
The ethical point of view which was developed from this belief,
of an asceticism active within the sphere of one’s calling, but
detaching itself from the world, and a rational methodical
discipline of self-consecration in preparation for the future life,
stood in direct opposition to the Lutheran ethic of moral neutral-
ity, tolerance, and the free outworking of the Spirit. In spite of
the fact that it accepted the doctrines of the Church, the Sacra-
ment, and the Territorial Church system, the affinity between
Pietism and the spirit of the sects is evident. Its opponents cer-
tainly emphasized this fact often enough, for they constantly
compared Pietism with the Anabaptist movement, with the
followers of Valentine Weigel, the Rosicrucians, and the Quakers.
The driving force in this movement was clearly akin to those
sects. The opponents of Pietism, however, would not see, or at
least they would not admit, that their own Church system really
contained certain affinities with the sects. Pietism was based, and
rightly so, upon the Bible, and upon Luther’s earlier ideals,
and it was forced into existence by the formalism of the State
Church system. Its attitude towards the world and towards
civilization was still only the logical inference from Luther’s
PROTESTANTISM 717
doctrine of Original Sin and conversion, which prevailed as soon
as the Lutheran doctrine of Baptism, and its freer but ill-defined
attitude towards the world, was less emphasized. Also its imitation
of the Calvinistic conventicle, and the connection with Calvinistic
asceticism and moral discipline, was no mere casual, foreign
influence of Calvinism, but an appropriation of the means, already
closely related, which had been evolved for similar reasons, and
which were to lift the German movement out of its distress.
In addition, all the other logically connected phenomena of this
sectarian ascetic spirit were also introduced : the emphasis upon
the co-operation of the laity ; the independent study of the Bible
without ecclesiastical control of exegesis ; depreciation of the State
Church and of the “ subsidia ” religionis ; the demand for the right
to excommunicate and to exercise Church discipline as an
activity of the Church, and not merely as a function of the police ;
the impulse towards personal and experimental religion; the
reduction of all secular culture to the elements which were
practically useful, and the entire rejection of philosophy and
theology; the evangelizing and educating of baptized but not
really “converted” children; the introduction of confirmation
in place of adult baptism ; the new Pietistic Church order of joint
ministry, which assumed that the Church began with the gather-
ing together of individuals in groups, but which at the same time
maintained the silent transference of authority over these groups
to the Government; under these circumstances, for the time
being, practical results were impossible. In Germany there were
no large Separatist movements, owing to the fact that, unlike the
law^of England and the Netherlands, the law of the Empire did
not permit them.
Pietism remained within the Church; indeed, at the time of
the Enlightenment it bound itself very closely with the relics of
the old dogmatic ecclesiastical system, and from its reawakening
at the beginning of the nineteenth century there arose the great
renewal of orthodoxy in this century, through which, however,
the Church life of the present day has been impregnated with a
mass of Pietist explosive material.
To sum up : Pietism represents the sect-ideal within the Church ;
the mystical elements with which it was mingled will be dealt
with in a later section of this book. The influence of the Church-
type upon the sect-ideal is everywhere quite evident ; this appears
not only in questions of doctrine and organization, but, above all,
in its attitude towards social questions. Like Puritanism and the
later Baptist movement, Pietism had no trace of the tendency of
7 18 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the sect towards political and social radicalism. It did not need to
become bourgeois like the early Baptist movement ; from the very
beginning it was bourgeois and loyal. In the spirit of Lutheranism
it accepted the existing social order of the State; the idea of
Christianizing the social order did not occur to it. On the contrary,
Pietism liked to be connected with the ruling class and with the
aristocracy; it aimed solely at Christianizing the hearts of men.
It carried on Home Mission work, and healed social ills by a new
kind of charity, which depended on free group initiative; no-
where did it touch the fundamental facts of existing conditions.
The resemblance between Pietism and the suffering and perse-
cuted Baptist movement is slight. Pietism expressed asceticism
and renunciation of the world in the form of the acceptance of
existing conditions of labour, rather in the sense in which Puritan-
ism and the later developments of the Mennonite movement had
expressed it. In this respect Pietism comes into touch with the
commercial ethic of the Calvinistic churches. Pietism teaches that
secular business and interests have no intrinsic value of their
own; the Christian man takes part in them as the “Lord’s
steward”, simply for the purposes of civil life, and of the “Kingdom
of God”. Pietism does not seek to reform the world; it simply
gathers “earnest Christians” together into a party within the
Church, and seeks to convert the heathen; this all shows how
indifferent it is to questions of social reform. Its task is simply to
seek the conversion of individuals, and to gather “converted”
souls into groups for fellowship and edification. Its interest in the
release of the third estate, that is, of the laity, is concerned purely
with the religious and ecclesiastical sphere, and consists in giving
the right to possess an independent personal piety, and the right
to form conventicles.
It is precisely at this point that a characteristic distinction
appears between German Lutheran and Calvinistic Pietism.
When Calvinism, which aimed from the very beginning at the
creation of a “holy community”, came under the influence of
Pietism, it found its supporters mainly in the lower and middle
classes, whereas in German Pietism, on the contrary, the lower
middle classes preferred to become Separatists, and Pietism within
the Church simply concerned theologians and the aristocracy.
The Lutheran Church system is, indeed, not inwardly at home in
Pietism and its ethic, even though the Lutheran doctrines of sin
and conversion come very close to its spirit.
Pietism, of course, has produced some notable effects upon the
development of civilization : under its influence life became more
PROTESTANTISM 7ig
personal and inward, social distinctions faded into insignificance,
and social existence became more humane. On the other hand,
these very influences often became perverted, owing to the
Pietists’ tendency to be on good terms with the aristocracy, and
to form cliques and parties. Pietism is, in fact, a revivalist form of
Christianity, fitted to meet the needs of small groups, which seeks
and finds its support in the Territorial Church, while it leaves the
world and secular civilization severely alone. When it does influ-
ence civilization at all, particularly on the political and social
side, it does so reluctantly and almost involuntarily. Here, once
more, we see the standpoint of the persecuted sect, which here
comes to terms with the existing organization in Church and
State. This is why Pietism was comparatively popular with the
authorities when they had learned — with great difficulty — that
it was impossible to maintain the old purity of a State religion.
Pietism supplies the State with loyal servants, who practise sub-
mission as part of the asceticism of their calling ; it does not seek
to alter existing conditions; the only obligation it lays on the
Government is that of patriarchal kindness and care for the com-
mon weal, and it obliterates class distinctions only within the
limits of religious intercourse ; indeed, this also did not take place
to any appreciable extent . 459
The Moravians
The fact that in Pietism the sect-ideal is so closely connected
with the Church explains why the few important Separatist
movements which took place were not voluntary, but were the
result of actual compulsion. This is true of the only larger Separa-
tist ihovement, the Herrnhut Community. Like the Quakers, this
body was not a simple expression of the sect-idea, even though it
was connected with the Church. From the very beginning it
contained various elements. On the one hand, it consisted of the
Lutheran inwardness of Count Zinzendorf, a man of great per-
sonal charm and attractiveness, who, in an age of sentimentality,
seemed like some gallant Crusader of olden days. His aim was to
unite the true lovers of Christ in small groups, rather after the
earlier ideal of Luther and Spener’s system of “conventicles”.
He never dreamed of the impossibility of uniting these supra-
ecclesiastical Philadelphian groups with Lutheranism. On the
other hand, the Herrnhut Community contained the sectarian
impulse of the Moravian Brethren, who, having incidentally
settled upon the Count’s estate, became to him a “chariot and
4M See p. 956.
720 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
warhorse” for gaining the victory; in the process, however, his
conventicle idea developed into that of a sect, organized on an
exclusive basis, founded upon the voluntary principle, and upon
maturity in Christian experience, exercising powers of discipline
and excommunication — a body in which laymen exercised a
spiritual ministry. Out of the tension and conflict between these
two tendencies, and in consequence of the rejection of the Count’s
“conventicle” idea by the official Lutheran Church, there arose,
finally, a new Church, which gradually settled down into an
established existence, with inherited traditions, rather like that of
the Society of Friends. It had no objection to Infant Baptism,
but its chief aim was to attain the highest possible degree of
inward piety and Christ-mysticism, by means of worship, organ-
ization, and education. Nevertheless, it still retained important
characteristics of the sect-ideal. The body of communicants was
to be as pure as possible ; and discipline was directed to this end.
The small size of the community, its system of mutual control,
its independence of the State, its legal character as an “associa-
tion” ( Verein ), its business undertakings which arose in order to
secure its existence, its urgent desire to win souls freely to Christ
through missions to the heathen, above all the endeavour after
an active purity of the Christian ethic which was to distinguish
its members from the “children of this world” : all this gave to
the Church of the Brethren — partly with and partly against its
will — a certain likeness to the sects, which it was in the habit of
ascribing to the influence of the Bohemian Brethren, and of the
Waldensians, and through them to the Early Church. Traces of
an attitude to the Sermon on the Mount similar to that which
characterized the Baptists are also apparent. Finally, their ethic
(even though it was imparted and established by the Count in
the spirit of a happy and childlike Lutheran piety) was com-
paratively tolerant towards the world, and quite unsystematic;
on the other hand, however, through its desire to present an
active Christian piety very different from the life of the world,
and through Calvinistic accessions to the community, it was, in
many respects, related to Puritanism. In any case, the Moravians
felt a closer affinity with Calvinism than with Lutheranism. The
economic results, too, which were produced by these circum-
stances soon appeared in the shape of an excellent and increas-
ingly successful business life, characterized by integrity and
frugality. This tendency was strengthened by the fact that at
first the community was gathered from the shifting element in
the population, and that it became limited essentially to active
PROTESTANTISM 7 a,
members who were engaged in trade, and also by the fact of the
necessity of meeting their own expenses, particularly those con-
nected with their mission work, which meant that they were, and
are, forced to depend on the business enterprise of the whole
community . 460
The Methodists
Of much greater importance was the founding of Methodism,
which was one of the most important events in the later history
of Christianity, and of modern spiritual development. It marked
the renewal of orthodox Christianity in a quite individualistic
accentuated form; it anticipated the continental revival move-
ment of the nineteenth century, and was one of the means by
which the English world was rendered proof against the spirit of
the French Revolution; it presented a radical opposition to the
whole spirit of modern science and civilization. Methodism, like
the Moravian Church — by which, indeed, it had been stimulated,
and for which, like the latter, it had been prepared by a Pietist
conventicle-movement — was an attempt to leaven the life of the
National Church with the influence of smaller groups of genuine
and vital Christians. Externally, it was only forced to take up an
independent position because the pulpits of the National Church
were closed to it. Inwardly, however, this separation was in-
evitable. For this body, like the Moravian Church, belonged
essentially to the sect-type and not to the church-type, in spite of
its earnest desire to remain inside the Established Church.
Indeed, its own nature forced it to adopt a far more independent
attitude than the Moravian Church had felt necessary from its
own point of view. For the primary aim of Methodism was not to
gather devout lovers of Christ into small fellowship groups, but to
awaken the masses, which, under the influence of an “enlight-
ened” Church and the pressure of industrial capitalism, had
become indifferent, dull, and coarse. The movement was already
faced by the conditions produced by the wide development of
modern science, and by the social situation, which, on the Con-
tinent, were only developed in the nineteenth century. The
Methodist Revival laid renewed and extreme emphasis upon the
doctrine of Original Sin, and it taught that the way to salvation
consisted in a direct sense of “assurance”, based on justification
through the Blood of Christ. Its leaders proclaimed that salvation
from hell, death, and damnation could not be attained by an inert
confidence in baptismal grace, nor by a certain measure of decent
460 See p. 959.
s
VOL. II.
722 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
and correct behaviour, but by a radical change, the conscious
passing from the state of condemnation to that of forgiveness and
peace, together with the genuine ethical energies released by this
experience.
The results of this Revival, however, which the Methodist
missionaries carried on amidst dangers and toils like those of the
first apostles, and which, with the aid of great open-air services,
they finally carried right into the life of the lower and middle
classes, had to be secured and gathered up into a coherent whole.
In order to achieve this end, however, organization was needed ;
Wesley, who was an indefatigable and indomitable missionary
like Paul, and a dominating, powerful organizer like Ignatius
Loyola, was a master in this art. As this process of organization
went on, the main characteristics of the sect-type, which were
already present in embryo, began to emerge in the stress laid on
adult conversion and on ethical Perfectionism. To the emotional
elements of the direct “sealing of the Spirit” and of “assurance of
salvation”, in which Methodism comes very near to the spirit
of the Lutherans and the Moravians, there was added a spirit of
composure and self-control in which Wesley remained true to
Puritan Calvinism.
The aim of Methodism was to win men and women to Christ,
who would then be genuine Christians, full of “joy and peace in be-
lieving”, and who, as far as they could, were aspiring to perfection ;
the means was the gathering of such Christians into an organized
society. At first, during the original period, the Society consisted
of adult members who came in from the outside ; the question of
Infant Baptism did not need to be raised, since all the members
belonged to the Established Church which dispensed the Sacra-
ment of Infant Baptism throughout the land. A probation period
of six months preceded the final reception into the Society. The
members received their Society ticket, which had to be renewed
every quarter, and within the Society they were divided up into
classes of about ten persons, who gathered themselves together
weekly under a lay leader for mutual fellowship, guidance, and
Bible study ; the renewed grant of the Society ticket, and the final
reception of candidates, were dependent upon the leader’s report.
The groups, again, were gathered together into districts which
were visited systematically by an ordained pastor ; the latter had
at the same time the duty of carrying on evangelistic meetings for
outsiders. The districts, again, were placed under the supreme
guidance of the General Conference of the famous Hundred,
which was constituted at first merely by the arbitrary choice of
PROTESTANTISM 723
Wesley, then according to seniority and then by the addition of
elected ministers, and finally also of elected laymen.
We cannot enlarge any further upon the development of this
system of Church government, whose main features have remained
unaltered to the present day. Its general character is clear. It is
something between an Order, established upon a foundation of
unconditional obedience and minute mutual control, like the
Jesuit Order (with which Methodism was compared in its early
days), and a society of earnest Christians, proving the reality of
their faith by their lives, founded upon entirely voluntary mem-
bership in which the members have a permanent share, as in the
Baptist organizations.
The two sociological forms of the sect-type, the Religious Order
and the voluntary association, are here combined; at the same
time they are made elastic for the reception of increasing numbers,
without, however, allowing the opposition to the popular piety
of the church-type to disappear. Infant Baptism is, in reality,
replaced by the experience of the New Birth, which is connected
with conversion, and its recognition by admission to the Society.
Nothing was altered in Church dogma, its supernatural character
was only intensified, and its general meaning was summed up in
conversion and its presuppositions, and in sanctification with its
heavenly results. The continuance of the Church was taken for
granted, but in spite of that its spirit was denied. This necessarily
led to external separation, in England itself last of all.
When this separation and independence had been achieved,
Methodism passed through the same experience which had be-
fallen the Baptists, the Moravians, and the Quakers. An inherited
position was developed in which the children of members naturally
belonged to the community ; this fact, coupled with the reception
of increasing numbers of people, who to-day (counting all the
different branches of Methodism) number about 30 millions, with
the increase of the clerical element, which was unavoidable under
these circumstances, and with the introduction of scientific
theology and general culture, with the many influences which
modified the original attitude of opposition to the world and to
civilization, finally led Methodism to become less and less of a
sect and more and more of a Church, or, rather, a number of
churches. All that remained of the original sect-spirit was a
certain sensitiveness about questions of organization, which is
peculiar to all societies organized on a voluntary basis — a rivalry
between laymen and ordained pastors, by which (in the various
denominations) laymen attained an increasing but varying share
724 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
in the general administration. It was this which led to most of the
separations and reunions which have taken place. Further, just
as in the case of the Baptists, the original restriction to certain
classes of Society disappeared. To begin with, Methodism gained
its victories in the middle and lower classes, among the miners
and in the industrial towns. To the middle and lower classes it
brought a new sense of the sacredness of personality ; it appealed
to the popular imagination, and awakened a devotion which
found expression in a most self-sacrificing charity. From the
aristocratic classes and the rural population, as well as from the
educated professional classes, it remained, on the whole, remote.
It had brought the impulse of personality and individuality into
the life of the masses, who were being brutalized by the industrial
system, and with its charity it helped them in their distress.
Otherwise, however, its ethic served to maintain the existing order
in Church and State ; it balanced the emotional character of its
type of conversion by emphasis upon sanctification, which was to
be attained by a severe and rigorous course of self-discipline, and a
far-reaching practice of asceticism in work. Its attitude towards
the social problem was displayed in its zeal for franchise reform,
for the liberation of the slaves, for philanthropic activity, as well
as in its strict Sabbatarianism, its opposition to modern culture,
science, and art. In modern Methodism this opposition to culture
has been modified, but it has not been removed . 461
The Labadists
In the Netherlands also, which were influenced by a certain
type of Puritanism, the sect-movement was present, although it
did not spread very widely because Rigorism had already been
allowed a fairly free course in the State churches. There a man
like Lodensteyn pushed the idea of the purity of Church member-
ship to such an extreme that the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper
could no longer be observed. Others so changed the baptismal
formula that they did not describe the children as “Christians”,
but merely as “destined for faith” — both strong proofs of sectarian
inferences drawn from Puritanism. Labadie alone tried to form a
sect, and in so doing he influenced others in the Separatist direc-
tion. This sect was like a monastic order; but since his leading
idea was not merely the idea of sanctification, but was chiefly
mystical in character, we will describe this in detail later on.
Further, this movement declined and disappeared during the first
generation after it had been founded. In the Netherlands and the
4M See p. 960.
PROTESTANTISM 725
Church of the Lower Rhine, however, it became the rallying-
point for a marked development of the sectarian spirit . 462
Modern Sects
Almost all the sects which have been mentioned are still in
existence. Many new ones of a similar type have been added —
the Salvation Army, the Adventists, the Irvingites, the Darbyists,
the Wurttemburg Temple, and others. Everywhere their activity
arouses the continental Territorial Churches, and actually within
them the so-called “Fellowship Movement” constantly produces
fresh analogies to the origin of those sects. From the point of view
of social doctrine they all bear the same characteristics : a society
founded on a voluntary basis apart from the State, Perfectionism,
asceticism expressed in hard work, a conservative-middle-class
outlook, even where their political attitude is theoretically one
of bourgeois Liberalism. These newer sects represent the natural
development of the persecuted Pietist element (within the
Church) during a period when the sect is no longer persecuted,
and when the absolute necessity of civil and social order for the
immensely complicated economic organism has become clear and
obvious. With the rise of Capitalism the early ideals of the perse-
cuted Waldensians and Baptists became impracticable. Hence-
forth the only course to pursue was : either to oppose Capitalism
altogether and to propose something entirely new, or, however
hostile certain groups might be to the world and to civilization
in general, to adjust themselves to the existing order of Society,
merely modifying or getting rid of the unchristian phenomena
which accompany it . 463
It is this sense of contrast which has reawakened in the modern
world the old ideas of world-renewal which characterized the
aggressive sects. These ideas have again come into prominence
through the Bible, particularly in the Sermon on the Mount,
and the idea of the Kingdom of God. There has been no recur-
rence of Hussite Wars, it is true, nor of armies of “saints” ; and at
the present day the aim of Christian Socialism is no longer
primarily to attempt a direct transformation of world conditions
4#2 On this point, see Gobel, II, Ritschl, I, and Heppe.
4«8 p or modern history of the sects, see “ Kirchen und Sekten der Gegenwai t ” ,
published by Kalbe *, 1907', further, the collection entitled Kerke en Secte , Baarn,
Hollandia Druckerij . For the so-called “Gemeinschaftsbewegung” , see the article by
Benser in Schiele’s Lexikon. For the connection with the general life of the people,
see Tischhauser: Gesch. d.ev. Kirche in derersten Hdlfte des 19. Jahrh.,1900 . These are
things which the modern educated German knows nothing about, but which
play an important part in real life.
726 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
by means of an organized society inspired by a common religious
aim, and strengthened by united worship. To-day men know or
feel instinctively far too clearly how complicated are the problems
of our common life and our common civilization involved in these
great questions, to attempt anything of this kind. With the rise
of the great sovereign States which dominate the life of the citizens
down to the smallest detail, and with the revelation of the nature of
the Capitalist system, the ideal has naturally changed its emphasis.
The ideal of the Christian Revolution has become at once more
spiritual and more complicated. Society in general is now sum-
moned to a change of heart and disposition under the influence of
the Gospel, which, with the co-operation of all social-technical
experts, shall then, and not till then, create a change in the
general situation which shall harmonize with the ideas of Christian
personality and of the Kingdom of God. To-day a genuine Christ-
ian love and sense of the value of personality seems to demand
expression along the following lines: a break-away in principle
from the individualistic social order which has grown up during
the last two centuries ; the equal surrender, not merely of indi-
viduals, but of all, for the common good ; the creation of just and
suitable means for a sufficient material existence for all, as a
basis for the development of spiritual values.
Thus, in its origin, with Owen and St. Simon, Socialism con-
tained within itself transformed Christian impulses of this kind.
By his reference to the Quaker, Bellers, Owen restored the direct
contact with the sect-ideal. In Germany this point of view was
represented by Weitling. Since, however, Socialism has finally
given up all connection with religion, and since the Marxist
development of the “class-war” idea and its acceptance of* the
Gospel of Naturalism, there have been no further developments
in this direction.
Christian Socialism
Its place, however, has been taken by Christian Socialism which
claims to present the demand of the Gospel for brotherhood, and
the coming of the Kingdom of God in its undimmed clarity and
uncompromising character, after its eyes had been opened by
Social Democracy to these inferences drawn from the Gospel.
Christian Socialism rejects the glorification of the prevailing
bourgeois order as one which represents a relative Natural Law
which owes its necessity to the fact of sin, and its character of a
Divine appointment to the Divine permission. Taught by the
modern science of the State and of Society, and by the experiences
PROTESTANTISM
727
of everyday life, Christian Socialism sees clearly one thing which
Calvinism (which was moving steadily in the direction of Christian
Socialism) did not see : that the possibility of a spiritual and ethical
development depends entirely upon the substructure of a healthy
collective social constitution, and that spiritual factors are very
closely connected with physical and economic factors. Christian
Socialism has learned from experience that the previous exclusive
emphasis upon “the ideological 55 aspect of the problem takes us
nowhere. It is this which constitutes its new element. Christian
Socialism, therefore, also rejects the Pietistic attitude of with-
drawal from “the world 55 into a sphere of “spiritual life 55 and
evangelistic effort, because it implies an attitude of despair
towards the world, and an attempt to quiet the Christian con-
science by winning a few souls, many of whom are not of the best.
In the view of Christian Socialism, to identify the Kingdom of
God with the Church, or to relegate it to the future life, seems to
be a position which corresponds neither with the Bible nor with
the demands of reality, both of which require a sphere on earth
in which it should be possible to rise above the mere struggle for
actual existence, and beyond the Gospel of Competition and the
survival of the fittest.
In this attitude, however, we perceive once more the familiar
characteristics of the primitive Christian tendency, the character-
istics of the aggressive sect which believes in an actual transforma-
tion of conditions in this world. The Kingdom of God and reason,
the Kingdom of God realized on earth , the invincible faith in the
victory of goodness and in the possibility of overcoming every
human institution which is based upon the mere struggle for
existence, the Christian Revolution : this is the primitive, splendid
ideal of the sect. It is only the Chiliast ideal translated into human
and intelligible terms. It is the ideal of a Christianity without
compromise, formulated in harmony with modern social views,
an ideal which could not be conceived within primitive Christ-
ianity with its faith in the miraculous Second Coming of Christ.
From the Patristic period the old Christian theories of the nature
of Society have been handed down through the centuries (with
changes which have been already described), and these same
theories still hold good in all communions, and until the present
day are continually being repeated, with a naive ignorance of the
world situation, in spite of the wholly altered practical position
in Christian ethics. Thus Christian Socialism alone has broken
through these theories, and forced men to think out afresh the
social ethic of Christianity and its relation to the actual changes
7*8 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
in the social order. It has laid bare the worm-eaten condition of
the previous conventional Christian ethic, which, at its best,
offered something for the ethics of the family and the individual,
but which, on the other hand, had no message for social ethics
save that of acceptance of all existing institutions and conditions,
much to the satisfaction of all in authority. Christian Socialism
has regained for the Christian ethic its Utopian and revolutionary
character ; once more it has brought upon its heralds the reproach
of Christ, which officials of Church and State are always ready to
hurl at all who indulge in humanitarian sentiment or in idealistic
dreams, at all who “wantonly deny the impossibility of over-
coming sin”, and the absolute necessity of their methods of
suppressing it.
The fundamental distinctions within the movement, which
expresses itself very differently among Catholics, Calvinists,
Lutherans, and Free Protestants, and which, above all, has greatly
agitated the Lutheran Church, cannot be described here. This
point alone must be emphasized: with this movement all the
interior problems of the Christian ethic and of that Stoic idealism
which is so closely connected with it, have been reawakened.
Once again we are faced with the question : how far is it at all
possible for the faculty of thought and of the Ethos, of faith and
of the world outlook, to oppose the natural processes of social
development, and to overcome and shape them, both from within
and from without? Is it possible that ideal laws of the Ethos and
of the Divine “nature of Humanity” can overcome, or at least
affect, the ordinary natural laws of social development? Can it be,
after all, that that which is humanly possible forms the limit of
that which is ideally necessary? Is there, in fact, any real hope of
a Christianity for the majority of mankind?
Tolstoi
It is a remarkable fact that while Western Christendom was
thinking in this way about a real Christian renewal of Society
within the modern State, the old radical sect-ideal found a prophet
in Russia, who, on the contrary, wished to break with the State
entirely, and with the whole technical and legal system of civil-
ization, in order to found a new humanity. It is the radical early
Christian ideal, shorn of its apocalyptic element, which also
refuses the aid of modem technical Rationalism.
If in spirit men will only break with the present world-order,
then out of the spirit of love itself a new world will arise — a world
464 See p. 962.
PROTESTANTISM 729
without State, law, or compulsion, without mechanization or the
desire for material pleasure. Tolstoi can only be completely under-
stood from the point of view of the Russian world, and perhaps
also from the point of view of the development of the Russian
sect-system. His significance, however, is this: for the West he
proclaims the old radical sect-ideal of a realization of the Sermon
on the Mount, in the artistic form in which it is alone possible to
attract the attention of modern cultivated people to such ques-
tions. Tolstoi’s message is based essentially upon the Sermon on
the Mount ; it is, however, characteristically free from all traces
of that tension which the expectation of the imminence of the
Coming of Christ produced in the Primitive Church ; it steers clear
also of all the dangers involved in an ecclesiastical ethic of com-
promise, or of a fusion with the busy activity of the Western world.
The fact that Tolstoi founds his whole message upon a conception
of God which is strongly coloured by Western pantheism, and
which dims the clear spiritual motives of the Sermon on the
Mount with a kind of modern ennui, need not detain us here.
Tolstoi’s understanding of the Gospel may be limited, but the
fact remains that his message — like that of the radical sect and of
Christian Socialism — is still a reminder of the essential funda-
mental features of the Gospel, which had been obscured by the
doctrine of the relative Natural Law of fallen humanity, and which
the classical Natural Law of Liberalism as well as the most modern
kind of Socialism had forgotten, and it had therefore obliterated
all traces of their connection with the source from which they
sprang . 465
At this point we must leave these questions. They belong to
the realm of systematic ethics, not to the history of ethics and of
social doctrine.
II. Mysticism and Spiritual Idealism
We must now direct our attention afresh to the second current
which flows alongside the main stream of ecclesiastical Protestant-
ism — to “spiritual religion” and mysticism. We have already
noticed it frequently in its connection with the sect-movement;
in the usual treatment of these questions this second element is
unhesitatingly classed with the sect-movement.
“Baptists and spiritual reformers” (“Tiiuferund Spiritualisten”)
has become a stock phrase, as if in essentials both were the same.
This is, however, an entirely erroneous idea. For these two move-
ments are like separate streams, which only mingle their waters
465 See p. 962.
730 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
now and again, but which historically vary greatly both in their
sources and in their development.
The subject with which we are now concerned is Christian
Mysticism and its significance within the sphere of Protestantism.
This Protestant mysticism also carries forward pre-Reformation
ideas and tendencies, like the sect, but it is far more closely con-
nected with Luther’s original main ideas, and is therefore still
more strongly rooted within Protestantism . 466
It is, however, a very difficult matter to distinguish clearly
between this type of mysticism and the sect-movement; this
difficulty is increased by the fact that the old heresiological
tradition ignored these differences entirely, and under its in-
fluence modern research has only learnt very gradually to distin-
guish between them. The difference becomes most evident when
we consider the sociological consequences to which these move-
ments gave rise; this indeed is the standpoint from which the
difference between the Church and the sect is most easily dis-
cerned . 467 If, however, we are to gain a right understanding of the
sociological consequences of mysticism, our first task must be
to understand the nature of the religious source whence these
consequences proceed. In the first place, therefore, we must make
a general analysis of the religious nature of mysticism. It is only
at this point in our inquiry that the time has come to deal with
this question, although mysticism itself goes back to the very
earliest days of Christianity; the intellectual content which
underlies Protestant mysticism in particular was formed partly
by the mysticism of St. Bernard and Richard of St. Victor, and
partly also by the deep, rich, and splendid German mysticism of
the later Middle Ages.
Mysticism : A Direct Religious Experience
In the widest sense of the word, mysticism is simply the insist-
ence upon a direct inward and present religious experience. It
takes for granted the objective forms of religious life in worship,
ritual, myth, and dogma ; and it is either a reaction against these
objective practices, which it tries to draw back into the living
process, or it is the supplementing of traditional forms of worship
by means of a personal and living stimulus. Mysticism is thus
466 See p. 962.
467 For the difference between both the remarks concerned in Hegler , see
information in Harnack's Dognungeschichte , ThLZ 1S98, Nr. 9, and Luthardt:
Gesch. d. christl. Ethik II, 249/ ; also Sippell: Chr. W ign y pp. 955-957, gives
important information in line with my definition of the conception of the sect.
PROTESTANTISM 73l
always something secondary, something which has been deliber-
ately thought out, although this emotional condition which
has been deliberately produced is characteristically connected
with an immediacy of feeling which is the entire opposite of the
former process. Thus it always contains a paradoxical element,
a certain hostility to popular religion and its average forms of
expression, an artificiality which, however, is again extinguished
by its own thirst for direct communion with God. Hence the
primitive religious fact itself in which experience and the expression
of the experience are simply identical, is never mystical . 468 The
vitality of the religious sense, however, when it is faced with
objectified religion, easily and often develops mystical character-
istics. It expresses itself in ecstasy and frenzy, in visions and
hallucinations, in subjective religious experience and “inward-
ness”, in concentration upon the purely interior and emotional
side of religious experience. Certainly these visions are rarely
creative in the sense of imparting fresh knowledge; they are
almost always expansions and interpretations of the common
faith, as was the case with the spiritual gifts of the early Christians,
and with the innumerable visions and prophecies of mediaeval
recluses and saints, an experience which has been repeated all
through the centuries, down to the present day.
Alongside of, or within, the recognized forms of worship,
mysticism creates special and more intimate mysteries, in which
salvation is appropriated in a peculiarly inward manner; in
these mysteries the ancient cults of sacred meals, “feeding upon
the god”, of sacrifice, of a new birth from the divinity into an
immediate eating and drinking of the life of the divinity, become
intensified and inward to the point of a real new birth and deifica-
tion. Mysticism creates prophecies and ecstasies as well as fantastic
allegories and a “spiritual” interpretation of the objective side
of religion. This mystical sense, however, can also create a passion-
ate realism of communion with the gods, which makes the
ancient cults or the accepted rites the means of immediate sub-
stantial union. The Hellenistic mysteries united the most coarse
and material conceptions with “spiritual” theories which reduced
them all to a symbol, which still, however, had a wonderful effect.
According to Paul, the Christian Supper of the Lord was itself a
mystical creation; and when the Eucharist became an objective
ecclesiastical rite, Eucharistic mysticism transformed it, for the
second time, into a mystical experience.
Above all, eroticism here plays a leading part, since either the
4#s See my articles upon Revelation , Faith , Faith and History , in Schiele s Lexikon •
732 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
sexual stimulation is also used to stimulate religious enthusiasm,
or the latter strengthens and expresses itself in sexual stimulation.
The imagery of Love and the “Wine-shops” of Sufi poetry, and
certain Christian interpretations of the Song of Songs, harp upon
the same string in the spiritual life.
On the other hand, this immediacy of feeling likes to escape
from the finite world of sense through a spirituality which either
treats it with indifference and ignores it, or removes it to a distance
by means of ascetic mortifications. Mysticism is thus open to the
incursions of a spiritual Pantheism and of a radical Dualism of
flesh and spirit, of time and of eternity ; and, in connection with
it, to the suggestions of an asceticism which crushes all that is
finite, or of a Libertinism which treats everything as equally
indifferent.
Mysticism in the New Testament
Thus, in all religious systems in these varied forms mysticism
is a universal phenomenon. It reached a particularly high stage
of development in India, Persia, Greece, Asia Minor, and Syria.
It was only natural that it should appear within the primitive
Christian movement, where it developed partly from within,
out of its own life, and in part was introduced from without and
eagerly accepted . 469 It is to this mysticism that the so-called
“Enthusiasm” of the Primitive Christian Church, a large part of
the “spiritual gifts”, the “speaking with tongues”, the power of
exorcism, the whole of its spiritual activity, belongs ; this pheno-
menon recurs again and again, in the Christian sect-movement,
down to the present day, bringing home with great power the
redemptive energy of the Gospel to the individual soul. Paul, in
particular, on his mystical side represents this type of Christianity
which existed along with his Church convictions in a permanent
state of tension, though he himself was not aware of a conflict
between the two tendencies. Paul took over the Christ-cult of
the Primitive Church as a form of religion which had already
been objectified in worship, tradition, and organization. But he
inspired it with a deep and passionate mysticism, which also
utilized the ancient terminology of the pagan mysteries. It is in
this alone that his religious originality consists, contrasted with
the view of the Primitive Church ; and it was only thus that his
anti-Jewish universalism became practically effective. Thus the
449 For the subject in general, see Edv. Lehmann: Mystik in Heidentum und Christen -
turn, igoi; A. Merx: Ideen und Grundlinien einer allgemeinen Gesch. der Mystik , 1903;
above all, Erwin Rohdes' Psyche , also James: Varieties of Religious Experience .
PROTESTANTISM
733
Lord’s Supper, the centre of the new cult, became to him a
mystical, substantial union, and Baptism became an actual
dying and rising again with Christ. To him Christ became an
actual sphere of life of a supersensual kind, in which the believer
lives, feels, and thinks, and becomes a new spiritual personality,
“a new creature”. Thus all that was merely ceremonial and
traditional was relegated to the sphere of “the flesh” and “the
world”, and the “Christ according to the flesh” fades out of sight.
So the history of Israel was allegorized and spiritualized, in order
that it could be directly applied to the Christian believer, and
the Christian community became the spiritual Body of Christ.
Ecstasies and visions were not wanting, spiritual gifts were
exalted and cultivated, and incorporated into a new spiritual
life.
Here, in this primitive Christian pneumatic enthusiasm, and
in the Pauline Christ-mysticism, lie the inexhaustible sources of
Christian mysticism. In the Fourth Gospel this mysticism has
already become calm and controlled, and adjusted to the historical
and objective side of religion. Here, in particular, however, it
has also produced or discovered its really characteristic formulas
— flesh and spirit, darkness and light, allegory and “the letter”.
Other early Christian writings contain similar elements.
Through the New Testament, spiritual enthusiasm and Pauline
mysticism became a permanent source of power, stimulating the
corresponding sense of need and vivifying its formulas. This
mysticism has expressed itself in a very vital way at all periods
of Church history, and particularly at all periods of criticism of
tradition, of religious decline, and of new religious developments.
Tfie germ of the idea of the Church as an institution was already
latent within Primitive Christianity, for it was given naturally
with the conception of grace, of a finished salvation, and of the
salvation of the world. Primitive Christianity also contains the
germ of the sect-idea, which reveres the Sermon on the Mount as
the moral law of its Master and continues His expectation of the
coming of the Kingdom of God upon earth, and gathers the pure
and holy into the fellowship of the Church which waits for Christ’s
return. Primitive Christianity also contains the germs of a mysti-
cism for which this fleeting world is but a symbol, all that belongs
to the sense-life and to the earthly sphere a mere limitation ; for
which every form of worship is only a means of substantial union,
and all faith simply a direct translation from the visible to the
invisible, into the very life of God and Christ . 470
470 See p. 963.
734 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Mysticism and the Philosophy of Religion
Now, however, we must seek to distinguish mysticism in the
narrower, technical concentrated sense in which it is used in
the philosophy of religion from this wider mysticism with its
immense variety. The phenomena which have just been described
proceed directly from the emotional sphere, and for that reason
they are comparatively instinctive and spontaneous, and can be
combined with every kind of objective religion, and with the
customary forms of worship, myth, and doctrine. They contain
no kind of doctrine and theory about themselves ; at the most all
they possess is a primitive technique of religious self-cultivation
and the production of a certain temper. Their varied forms of
expression — enthusiasm, orgiasm, contemplation and Gnosticism,
allegorical and spiritualizing tendencies, the renewal or the
bringing forth of forms of worship — are quite different from each
other, and they develop very different results which often cancel
each other out. Hence they do not essentially affect the existing
sociological connection with religion, for they simply mean an
intensification of its powers, or a particular emphasis upon some
of its elements, or perhaps they add new forms of worship ; but
concrete religion they do not deny.
The whole question can, however, sometimes assume a far more
unified aspect, and then a considerable sociological element is
introduced into the situation. The active energies in mysticism
of this kind can become independent in principle, contrasted with
concrete religion; they then break away from it and set up a
theory of their own which takes the place of the concrete religion
and of its mythos or doctrine ; this may take place either by means
of open denial, or through an allegorical change in interpretation.
When this takes place, however, mysticism realizes that it is an
independent religious principle ; it sees itself as the real universal
heart of all religion, of which the various myth-forms are merely
the outer garment. It regards itself as the means of restoring an
immediate union with God ; it feels independent of all institutional
religion, and possesses an entire inward certainty, which makes it
indifferent towards every kind of religious fellowship. This is its
fundamental attitude ; it does not vary whether the mystic adheres
externally to the religious community or not. Henceforward union
with God, deification, self-annihilation, become the real and the
only subject of religion;
This theme is then presented as the abstract content of mystical
experience, and is made the general universal essence of all
PROTESTANTISM 735
inward and genuine religious processes, A union with God of this
kind, however, further requires a general cosmic theory in which
is established both the possibility and the manner of realizing
this process of salvation. It also requires a technique of causation
and completion of the mystical experience deduced from this
theory.
A theory of this kind must be able to show how it came to pass
that, in God, a separation between God and finite spirits could
take place, and how this separation can be overcome by the very
fact that the finite spirits have their being within God. It shows
how all that is finite proceeds from God and returns unto God, for
the sense of identity persisting through the separation becomes the
very means by which the sense of separation is removed. This
theory defines the degrees by which the creature falls away from
and then rises up again into God; finally, it shows clearly that
reflection upon and understanding of this process explains the
religious experience to itself, and thus it attains an understanding
of its own particular central content. The purely intellectual
process of this association of ideas, so it is said, is, where it is
really genuine and independent thought, the religious experience
itself, and through this intellectual process the religious experi-
ence again interprets and clarifies its own ideas. From this there
arise also the degrees of this experience, which are simply the
stages of this intellectual process translated into terms of spiritual
experience, to the point of the conscious attainment of the full
sense of identity.
This type of mysticism becomes an independent religious
philosophy, which recognizes that the religious process is the
samd universal expression and consciousness of the metaphysical
connection between absolute and finite being, and which dis-
covers everywhere, beneath all the concrete forms of religion, the
same religious germ, which, however, only reaches complete and
pure maturity under its fostering care. Thus mysticism becomes
independent of concrete popular religion, timeless and non-
historical, at most concealed under historical symbols, the only
valid interpretation of the religious process, under whatever form
it may be clothed. It becomes anti-personal and ascetic, since it
allows personality to be absorbed in God, because it regards the
senses and finite existence as the wall of separation between God
Transcendent and God Immanent. This type of mysticism gives
rise to that form of Pantheism which, however, in the philo-
sophical sense is no Pantheism, because in it the separation of the
finite ego from God is as important as its reunion with God. This
736 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
therefore tends to develop into the crudest Dualism or into a
gradual descending system of Emanations. It becomes a peculiar
kind of intellectualism, an intellectualism which looks down with
contempt upon the sense-bound standards of the intellect, and
which replaces the common, carnal, and unhallowed ways of
thought by a religious logic which is intelligible only to the
religious mind. It can, however, also become pure voluntaryism,
as soon as the dangers of thought for religious inwardness are felt,
and the main stress is laid upon union of the will with God, or
upon the decline of the will to live. Thus Brahmanistic speculative
mysticism and Buddhistic voluntary mysticism, the Dominican
mysticism of knowledge and the Franciscan mysticism of the will
and of love, are all able to exist side by side.
This technical mysticism in the narrower sense, with its own
philosophy of religion, has also appeared in various religious
spheres with a remarkable similarity of form : in Indian Brahman-
ism and its repercussion in Buddhism, in the Sufism of the Parsees
and of Persian Muslims, in the Neo-Platonism of the Greeks, in
the varied syncretism of late antiquity which is known as Gnosti-
cism. In the guise of Platonism, Neo-Platonism, and Gnosticism
it presented itself to the Early Church, which seized it eagerly
as a scientific foundation for its own religious doctrine, in the
same way as it took Stoicism into account for its moral and social
teaching, as a scientifically worked out analogy for its system of
ethics. The stages of this development within Christianity are
clearly defined. Jesus is not a mystic. He lives simply with His
gaze fixed on God, urges practical sanctification of life, and
proclaims the imminent realization of the ideal.
Paul and the ‘ ‘spiritual’ * men turn inward, spiritualize, and
revive the Christ-cult and the Christian tradition which had
grown up in the Early Church apart from philosophy and specula-
tion, and with a free use of the mystical language of the ancient
mysteries. The Gnostics, and the philosophers and theologians of
the Early Church, open their minds to the mystical philosophy
of religion, emphasizing more or less the concrete dependence
upon Christian history, and affirming in varying tones of em-
phasis the practical and ethical idea of personality.
Mysticism in the narrower and the technical sense of the word,
the mysticism which is concerned with the philosophy of religion,
therefore, also developed an immense importance within Christ-
ianity. It helped the scientific theology of the early Christians to
bring their faith in the Divine incarnation, in the hero of the
cultus, in Christ, into line with the scientific formulas of the
PROTESTANTISM
doctrine of the Trinity, which was conceived at first in harmony
with the theory of emanations, and then as the comuh^nhoi;/,
<* J* Son »«h the Father ta. It hcl “
define the possession of salvation as something to be attained
through union with God in the Christian cultus, and to give a
religious and philosophical meaning to its sacraments. It was also
of value for the apologetic of the early Christians, since mysticism
represented the natural universal religious consciousness which
comes to completion in the Incarnation of the Logos and in the
sacraments of the Church.
In connection with our present subject, however, all this is
only relevant in so far as the relative acceptance of mysticism
at that time formed the starting-point of and the justification for
an ever fuller penetration of mysticism into Christianity itself.
For us rather the significant effects of mysticism only emerge
clearly where the sense of need for the inwardness and quickening
of the religious process appropriated the technical methods of the
soul’s ascent to God, worked out by mysticism. This ascent was
described as a process by which the soul rose from meditation and
self-denial through ripening knowledge and union, to the heights
of ecstasy, and thus was able to attain and experience Christian
union with God and with Christ. Here Dionysius the Areopagite
forms not the only but the noblest bridge of union with the Neo-
Platonism which had most thoroughly formulated this doctrine.
The Alexandrian theologians and Augustine had also already
made their contribution. The decisive point, however, was not
reached until mediaeval piety accepted the traditional Christian
system, with its foreign elements inherited from antiquity (so
remote from the Germanic temperament) of cultus, doctrine, and
hierarchy ; this it did by way of mysticism, which breathed into
it an atmosphere of warm, personal piety. Thus St. Bernard and
the Victorines freed the Christian faith from dogmatic rigidity
and infused into it new warmth and vigour. Thus also the mystics
of the Reformation period describe the gradual ascent of the soul
from purgation, through illumination, right up to the heights of
blissful union with God.
Further, we must also note the doctrine of mystical union with
God or of the Indwelling of Christ as the very heart and basis of
all practical religious achievement, and the radiating centre of
religious ethics. Along these lines Christian mystics have sought
and found a substantial union with Christ, in which the Christian
experience became the principle of all religious activity and power,
and, on the other hand, practical power to overcome the world
738 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
became the test of the reality of union with Christ. In this way
the gulf between past and present, between doctrine and practice,
was overcome, and faith became the principle of direct practical
achievement. Thus the Christocentric piety of the Middle Ages
restored to believers direct access to Christ; the rock of Byzantine
dogma had been struck, and out of it there flowed rivers of living
water.
Luther also, sometimes revealed traces of this spirit, and it was
through these ideas that Karlstadt, Schwenkfeld, and Osiander
developed a mere faith in the doctrine of justification into the
power of a life which expressed itself outwardly in direct and
practical ways. This, too, was the tendency of the Christology
of all the “spiritual reformers” of that day; it enabled them to
interpret the Jesus of History and the mystically discerned Christ
of Experience by the more general principle of the Logos incarnate
in Christ, through whom they were brought into contact with the
eternal living fullness of God.
The Divine Seed
This latter element, above all, needs to be taken into account
as a means of establishing the mystical impulse towards an
interior life, and of breathing fresh life and energy into objective
religion upon a general theoretical scientific foundation. This
basis is held to be that universal cosmic process, which is also the
ultimate underlying truth in the Christian experience of salvation,
of the descent of the Absolute into the finite world of sense, in
which, however, God remains the Ground of the Soul, the Seed
and the Spark even of the Creature, which in selfishness and sin
asserts its right to an isolated independent existence. This is the
great doctrine of the Divine Seed, of the Divine Spark which
lies hidden in every mind and soul, stifled by sin and by the finite,
yet capable of being quickened into vitality by the touch of the
Divine Spirit working on and in our souls. This “seed” is the
source of all religious longing for and awareness of God. Simply
quickened by the historic revelation, this “seed” is developed into
a complete power of overcoming the world and of return to God
by the purely inward movement of the Spirit which is kindled
and strengthened within the soul. Here all the emphasis falls
upon the present, immediate, interior religious movement of
feeling and of thought, in contrast to all external authority, all
literalism in faith, to all theories which would make salvation
dependent upon historical facts and upon the individual’s know-
ledge and acceptance of these facts. Here the saving energy of
PROTESTANTISM
739
God joins forces with the movement of transient religious emotion,
and faith is certain that it is able to distinguish the motion of
the Divine Spirit from all merely human opinion and desire, by
the practice of self-examination and the cultivation of a selfless
spirit. All that is ecclesiastical, historic, dogmatic, objective, and
authoritative is changed into a mere means of stimulation, into
that which arouses that personal experience which alone is
valuable, and on which alone the hope of salvation is founded.
This is a theology of the subjective consciousness of salvation,
and no longer one which confines itself to the objective facts of
redemption. The Spirit, or the present living consciousness of
salvation, and the facts of history and of the cultus, have been
placed in a new relation. All that concerns the Church, doctrine,
and dogma seems to be simply a precipitation of a personal
religious life of that kind, and can only be understood in its true
sense by the gracious inward influence of the Spirit, the move-
ment of God within the soul. The spirit of God can only recognize
His own Presence in the Scriptures and in the Church, and only
thus can strength and nourishment be drawn from them; left
to themselves both the Bible and the Church are merely a dead
letter or an empty ceremonial. This is mystical “spiritual religion”
in the service of a direct and personal religious life, preserving
that which is alone worthy, a life in the spirit which rises above and
conquers the world.
German mysticism evolved this theory as the foundation of
practical reform, in connection with the emancipation of late
mediaeval lay-Christianity from its ancient setting; at the same
time* with varying consistency, it remained in touch with the
objective institution of the Church, and, so far as lay in its power,
it preserved the main Christian tendency by its emphasis upon
personality. According to this theory, the finite spirit achieves
actual reality in the world process ; in its selfish resistance towards
the Spirit of God it commits real sin, and through the working
of the Divine Spirit which lays hold of it in Christianity it is
raised to the true centre of personality and united with God. It
is true that the ultimate end of union with God in contemplation,
or in the surrender of the will to the Divine Love, still somehow
always involves a certain loss of selfhood in God. In this respect
Dante himself found it difficult to preserve the distinction. There
can, however, be no doubt that mysticism intends to maintain
the elevation, salvation, and deification of the true and genuine
centre of personality. The whole mystical idea itself is indeed at
the service of a personal living piety, of an “interior life” which
740 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
has a direct experience of salvation. This fact, together with the
relation between the inner working of the Spirit and the stimula-
tion, heightened power, and intensification which come from
history (which was somehow always maintained), distinguishes
this Christian mysticism from its ancient foundation of Neo-
Platonism, quite apart from the fact that the Trinitarian-Christo-
logical doctrine was retained and interpreted in this sense . 471
The mysticism of the period of the Reformation arose out of
this old mystical tradition, and its foundation in the New Testa-
ment, which constantly inspired it with fresh life. It is a matter
of common knowledge that Luther himself was greatly influenced
by it. Calvin, however, came far less under its influence. His
doctrine of the Eucharist, too, does not agree with it, but rather
with anti-Catholicism, and with the tendency to place a great
gulf between the Creator and the creature. Calvinism is related
to the sect-type, but not to mysticism. In spite of that, however,
mysticism penetrated into it through all the avenues which
were then possible, just as it penetrated into the Catholicism of
the Counter-Reformation and into Lutheran Pietism. While in
connection with Catholicism its strength lay in its desire to
represent itself as the complement of the exaggerated emphasis
upon the purely objective aspect of religion, and in its power to
unite itself with the Catholic doctrine of justification in the shape
of an inward substantial transformation of the believer ; 472 on the
other hand mysticism had a great attraction for Protestantism
in its fundamental emphasis upon personal assurance of salvation,
and, particularly in Lutheranism, in the doctrine of the present
happiness of those whom Christ has set free.
The spiritualized conception of the Church in Protestantism,
and the unsettlement which prevailed while the new Church
organizations were being formed, provided this movement with
scope for independent development. When this section was
excluded from the churches and needed some other support and
fellowship it found a very uncertain support and refuge in the
excited “Enthusiasm” of the Anabaptists and in their ascetic
system of morality. Some mystics remained entirely solitary, and
entrusted their knowledge only to the printed page . 47 24 Under
these circumstances there arose a Protestant mysticism which,
unlike Catholic mysticism, was not a compensation for ecclesi-
astical formalism, but which was a conscious, active, and inde-
pendent principle of religious knowledge, inward experience,
and morality. Only upon the basis of Protestant individualism
471 See p. 963. 478 See p. 964. 47la Cf. p. 739.
PROTESTANTISM
74i
and Paulinism did specifically Christian mysticism attain an
independent development, with new creative power, which
exercised an ever deeper influence upon ecclesiastical Protestant-
ism, and yet always remained inwardly separate from it. Antici-
pating the results of the modern, speculative, and autonomous
philosophy of religion, it pointed forward to the development
of modern Protestantism, and, in connection with Pietism, it
destroyed ecclesiasticism, making the ecclesiastical exclusiveness
and institutionalism of Protestantism increasingly uncertain.
“Spiritual Reformers”
This form of mysticism certainly found its highest and noblest
expression only in the most outstanding thinkers and the most
“interior souls” among the Protestant “Spiritual Reformers”, in
men like Sebastian Franck, Valentine Weigel, Dirck Coornheert,
and John Saltmarsh. Detached elements of this process of thought,
however, often appear among them all in an obscure connection
with ecclesiastical statements, as, for instance, in Karlstadt,
Schwenkfeld, and others. Conclusions of this kind were not un-
common in the “Enthusiasm” which played such a prominent
part in the early Anabaptist movement, in the beginnings of
Quakerism and in Methodism. Individuals also came to the same
conclusions, even though mere “Enthusiasm” which depends
upon sudden, extraordinary, and unregulated manifestations of
God in itself certainly has no connection with the mystic’s repose
in the eternal unchanging Divine Spark within the human soul.
Since, however, in all this the “enthusiastic” temperament still
presses forward through religious excitement into the direct
presence of the Spirit or of God, it has a strong tendency towards
mysticism, which was often fully developed by “enthusiastic” and
highly educated Baptists. The English Puritans passed from Piet-
ism and Enthusiasm into mysticism and “spiritual religion” — at
least in part — and when they did so it was with great vigour.
Continental Pietists also came under the same influence ; in both
instances the older “spiritual” literature was producing a belated
effect. As we have already noticed, the Congregationalists and
Independents were “Spiritualists” without realizing it. The
Quakers, in particular, developed their classic theory of the
Inner Light out of an “enthusiastic” movement, and thus found
rest of spirit and light in perplexity. It was, however, only when
“Enthusiasm” and the urge towards “inwardness” achieved
results of this kind that mysticism became real spirituality; at
the same time, in its anti-hierarchical tendency to further the
742 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
idea of the priesthood of all believers, this spirituality reveals its
Protestant character . 478
Thus we see clearly the difference between this “spiritual * 5
tendency and the sect-ideal and the Baptist movement. For the
Baptists the decisive element is the Law of Christ, the Sermon on
the Mount, and the absolute Law of Nature which agrees with
it. The “spiritual reformers”, on the other hand, know nothing
but the Spirit, its freedom and its inward impulse. They are
“Antinomians” and obey the light of conscience which has been
unveiled by the Indwelling Christ. The Anabaptists laid passion-
ate stress on Adult Baptism as the external sign of the covenant
with God. To the “spiritual reformers’* Baptism was a matter of
supreme indifference. They recognized solely the “Baptism of the
Spirit”, and they taught that only those who were spiritually
gifted were able to recognize those who belong to the true, pure,
Spiritual Church, or fellowship of the Spirit of Christ. The Ana-
baptists had external organizations and ceremonies: the Lord’s
Supper, the feet-washing, a constitution. The “spiritual reformers”
would admit nothing but the worship of God in spirit and in
truth; they recognized no external united Christian body, and,
at bottom, they had no use for sacraments. The Anabaptists
obeyed the external Word as their literal rule of life and their
external authority. The “spiritual reformers” depended upon the
Inward Word, the Logos, the Divine Seed, or the Divine Spark,
through whose impulses alone they were able to understand the
external Word, which they (who also held firmly to the doctrine
of inspiration) interpreted in an allegorical manner. The Ana-
baptists organized congregations, and appointed their members
to different offices ; they used ordination and carried on mission
work. The “spiritual reformers” dwelt within the Invisible Church,
in which the Spirit does all, and in which it is not necessary to
know each other according to the flesh. The Anabaptists formed
a community ruled by Christ and composed of genuine saints.
The “spiritual reformers” did not recognize a visible Church
at all, but they looked for the Third Age in which all men will
478 On this point cf. the very valuable writings of H. Heppe: Geschichte der
pietistischen Mystik in der katholischen Kirche , 1875, Geschichte des Pietismus und der
Mystik in der re/ormierten Kirche namentlich der Niederlande y 1879. The latter book
maintains its very considerable value alongside of RitschVs Geschichte des
Pietismus . — There is a one-sided ascription of mysticism to Catholicism in
Herrmann: Verkehr des Christen mit Gott, pp. 16-21 (English translation, Communion
with Gody pp. 19 ff.). In the school of Ritschl both mysticism and the sect-type
are referred back to Catholicism, in order that they may be excluded the more
surely from Protestantism.
PROTESTANTISM
743
be illuminated and led by the Spirit Himself; for them Christ
ruled only by the Spirit, which is identical with direct religious
experience. The Anabaptists also took the Apocalypse literally,
and calculated the Advent of Christ and the coming of the
Millennium. The “spiritual reformers * 5 spiritualized even the
Millennium, transforming it into an inward return of Christ to
hearts which at last are open to the Divine Love. The Anabaptists
laid great stress on the teaching of the Synoptic Gospels, on the
Jesus of History, and on His proclamation of the coming Kingdom
of God. The “spiritual reformers” appealed to Paul and to John :
they did not know Christ after the flesh, and through the Spirit
they were ever pressing on into an ever new and deeper knowledge
of God, which to them was alone the true work of God. These
differences are fundamental; their ultimate causes lie in the
Bible itself.
The distinctive sociological peculiarities of this kind of “spiritual
religion” are also manifest. Mysticism is a radical individualism,
very different from that of the sect. While the sect separates
individuals from the world by its conscious hostility to “worldli-
ness” and by its ethical severity, binding them together in a
voluntary fellowship, established upon mutual control and peni-
tential discipline, laying upon individuals the obligation to follow
the example and submit to the authority of Christ, increasing
individualism by placing it within the mutual influence of group-
fellowship and worship, — mysticism lays no stress at all upon the
relation between individuals, but only upon the relations between
the soul and God. It regards the historical, authoritative, and ritual
elements in religion merely as methods of quickening the religious
sense with which, in case of need, it can dispense altogether.
“Spiritual religion”, in particular, in its intense emphasis upon
“first-hand experience”, actually tends to sweep away the histori-
cal element altogether, and in so doing it eliminates the only
centre around which a Christian cult can be formed. Thus this
kind of religion becomes non-historical, formless, and purely
individualistic, although certainly in very varying degrees of
consistency. So long as it remains consciously Christian, the
Bible and the historic Figure of Christ still play an important
part; this aspect, however, is never stressed sufficiently strongly
to produce a firmly established community, with a common
centre of worship, history, and authority. Whatever organized
forms it does adopt are loose and provisional, mere concessions
to human frailty, without any sense of inward necessity and
Divine inspiration. Its individualism, therefore, differs entirely
744 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
from that of the sect. The sect characteristics — personal confession
of faith in Christ, and the ever-renewed creation of fresh forms
of fellowship through the mutual influence of individuals upon
each other — are absent. Instead there is simply a parallelism of
spontaneous religious personalities, whose only bond of union is
their common Divine origin, their common spirit of love, and their
union in God, which is the free and invisible work of the Divine
Spirit. In itself, this kind of spirituality feels no need for sacraments
or dogmas, for a ministry or for organization. Its spirit of fellow-
ship, like the religious illumination itself, is solely the work of the
Spirit, which is the same in each soul, and can be recognized
alike by each soul, from which also in each separate instance there
arises the interior union of souls and the active expression of
Christian love. The individualism of the Anabaptist movement
has been transcended, since this “spiritual religion 5 ’ dispenses
with all mediate and organized forms of worship and fellowship,
placing faith and feeling in an entirely independent position. On
the other hand, this kind of individualism is much weaker than
that of the Anabaptist movement — (with its emphasis upon
continual activity and the active holiness of its members who are
united in a vital fellowship) — since its main tendency is towards
quietude and abandonment, in which love is exercised only in
individual instances. Individualism can, indeed, mean very
different things, and have a very different effect, according to its
basis and its setting, as we have already seen in the difference
between mediaeval individualism with its emphasis upon
differentiation and gradation, and Protestant individualism with
its stress on the equal autonomy and equal obligation of all towards
the community.
So far it might seem as though this kind of “spiritual religion 55
had no positive sociological character at all, or as though it only
achieved fellowship incidentally through lack of clarity. This,
however, is not the case. First of all, as we have already seen,
“spiritual religion 55 presupposes both the unity of the “Divine
Ground 55 which is the source of all personal religion, and the
unity of aim which binds all souls together in one. Only it does not
strive to create fellowship and unity by its own human activity —
by founding organizations and societies — but it leaves this work
to the Divine action through the Spirit. Further, this “spiritual
religion 55 is still Christian. This does not mean simply that the
Spirit is fully incarnate and visible in Christ, thus gathering
believers into an historic and definite unity, but also that the
ethical element of Will in the Christian and prophetical idea of
PROTESTANTISM
745
God, urges it towards active charity and self-giving to the
brethren.
Sociological Theory of “Spiritual
Religion” : The “Invisible Church”
Hence at this point there arises the idea of fellowship peculiar
to this kind of “spiritual religion” : the idea of the Invisible Church,
of the purely spiritual fellowship, known to God alone, about
which man does not need to concern himself at all, but which
invisibly rules all believers, without external signs or other human
means. The conception of a purely spiritual fellowship, which is
carried forward independently by the power of the Spirit, is the
background of this sentiment, and in this the individual is there-
fore relieved of all obligation to organize and evangelize, and
from all connection with ecclesiastical and sectarian organization.
There is no need to make any efforts to prove and maintain the
historical basis of faith ; it appears spontaneously wherever the
Spirit beholds Himself. Since in reality all Christianity is identical
with the stirring of the divine “Seed” in the soul, Christ also is
omnipresent, not merely in His historical form, but also in every
true believer. Non-Christian religious souls can thus also be revela-
tions of the Christ. Once again, however, this means that all forms
of religion, viewed from the Christian standpoint, are regarded
as identical with Christianity. The best method, therefore, of
making this fellowship an active and practical force is the practice
of toleration, coupled with faith in the power of God to make this
fellowship effective by the might of His Spirit. Thus the “spiritual”
man everywhere seeks to reach others at the deepest levels of the
soul, wherever these are at all accessible. He exercises Christian
charity, however, not in founding institutions or societies, but
in practical life, wherever the claims of love present themselves
in the guise of homely duty. Thus in this Christian “spiritual
religion” there is an element of fellowship which is closely related
to Luther’s earlier ideas; the only difference is that Luther
required the “spiritual life” to be kept in close relation with the
Word, the Sacrament, and the ministry, whereas the “spiritual
reformers” proclaimed the need for the free and untrammelled
movement of the Spirit, an increase of knowledge and of freedom
in opposition to “the letter” of Scripture.
But the sociological element in mysticism goes still farther.
Even the mystic is human, and he feels the need for the give-and-
take of intimate fellowship with other souls. In the mystic, too,
this is no mere human weakness but a Christian duty, inculcated
746 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
plainly by the example of the pure love of the Primitive Church
as a command of the Spirit of God. Where, however, mystics
do form groups they do not intend them to take the place of the
great Invisible Church (sis a sect would tend to do), or to interfere
with God’s own work of spreading the influence of the Spirit;
the aim of these groups is purely personal; they are intimate
circles for edification. This kind of fellowship expressed itself in
various ways, as for instance in Philadelphianism ; and in the
formation of groups round spiritual directors and deeply experi-
enced leaders. There was nothing rigid about these groups;
they formed and re-formed naturally and easily, according to the
situation in any given place. At other times this spirit expressed
itself in organizations which were formed on the family pattern;
these groups were formed by religious people who lived a com-
munity life which was similar to that of the cloister; they were
controlled by ideas which were in entire agreement with the
mystical ideas contained in monasticism. They had no intention,
however, of claiming to be “the true Church” or “the Christian
community” ; they were merely personal and casual in character,
groups within the Invisible Church which the Spirit calls into
being, through which, in some incalculable manner, He influences
the whole . 474 Only in an intimate group of this kind can worship
be offered in purity and truth, arising out of a spiritual fellowship
in which love has been truly kindled on the altar of intimate
friendship and union in God. In this method of worship there are
no magical “means of grace” and no ritual ordinances; all the
stress is laid upon the mutual fellowship of hearts — “representa-
tive action” as Schleiermacher very unecclesiastically describes
the cultus. Within such groups the Lord’s Supper and the Xgape
can be renewed and spiritualized in their true mystical meaning,
in a way which is impossible to the Church of the masses, or in
the quarrelsome exercise of discipline among the sects. As the
polemical writers of that day used to say, “spiritual religion” is
super-ecclesiastical, “syncrctistic”, “indifferent”, or “fanatical”.
In reality this movement reabsorbs rigid historical dogma into
the living movement and development of the Spirit; in the
psychological processes themselves it seeks the essence of revela-
tion and a present redemption.
Effects of “Spiritual Religion” on Dogma
Since all mysticism first arises in opposition to objective dogmas
and forms of worship, it assumes in a very aristocratic way that
474 See p. 964.
PROTESTANTISM
747
the concrete forms of worship will continue to be the religion of the
masses. It is its mission, however, to call the true children of God
out of that external worship in order to lift them up into the
Kingdom of God which is purely within us. From every side it
sees souls growing into this Kingdom. From this point of view
these more intimate groups are merely personal and changing
forms of fellowship, which express in a particular circle, with
enhanced vitality, the universal unity of the Spirit. That is why
so many mystics remain within the Church, which they do not
wish to replace by any other new organization; they look upon
their own circles as special groups which can quite well exist
within the Church itself. Several, of course, do reject the Church
altogether and live an isolated existence, but they comfort them-
selves with the thought of a better future, of a “third revelation”
when all shall be taught of God, and when an “unsectarian
Christianity of love” will unite all Christians in one fellowship
of love. Mystics are far less inclined to separate from the Church
than are the sectarians.
Naturally this whole way of thinking reacts upon the world of
doctrinal conceptions. As the main doctrines of the Church — of
Christ, the Trinity, the Work of Redemption through the Atone-
ment, and the sacraments which appropriate this redemption —
are closely connected with the ecclesiastical idea and with the
worship of the Church, the mystical movement stands out in
opposition to the current ecclesiastical doctrine of Redemption
and of the Sacrament. It recognizes no “finished salvation” with
which the Church is endowed as an organ of grace, but only,
primarily, the facts of revelation and redemption in the present
religious experience of each soul. Thus it feels no need of the
doctrine of the Atonement, and it sees in it only the logical, ethical,
and metaphysical inconsistencies which cause its disintegration.
“Spiritual religion” of this kind does not admit the possibility
of appropriating the benefits of redemption through worship, the
sacraments, or through Church organization. It rejects the whole
idea of an objective deposit of salvation upon which the Church
can draw in order to impart its benefits to those who need them ;
its main emphasis is upon the example of Christ as the source of
His continuing spiritual influence. Primarily it does not know
the “Christ after the flesh” at all, and it has no interest in the
doctrine of the Incarnation ; it sees the Divinity of Christ solely in
the Spirit of Christ of which the Jesus of History is merely the
concrete symbol. Therefore it either deifies Christ entirely, even
in His human nature, or it loosens the connection between
748 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the Divine and human elements in Christ. Thence there arise
now and again attacks upon the doctrine of the Trinity, which
come very near to placing Christ within a Neo-Platonic Emana-
tionism . 476 This type of religion does not strive after a mass
Christianity, for which, naturally, the forgiveness of sins stands in
the foreground, as a release from the unattainable degree of sancti-
fication without giving up the comfort of salvation ; in it the for-
giveness of sins recedes into the background, and it is replaced
by a direct experience of God and actual victory over sin through
the deification of the soul . 476
In all these aspects, however, “spiritual religion” is also opposed
to the sect, which presupposes the God-Man as the ruler and
founder of the religious community, and the work of salvation
as the complement of the efforts of a life of sanctification which
is still always imperfect. Nor has it any use for the ideas of the
sect with its literal historic Christ, and its retention of the Synoptic
message of the Kingdom of God. Only where the sect merges into
mysticism do we find it exercising this kind of doctrinal criticism,
as, for instance, among some Baptist and Quaker theologians. On
some other points, however, mysticism approaches the sect point
of view in doctrinal matters, but, characteristically, for very
different reasons. This applies, above all, to its repudiation of the
doctrine of predestination. The coupling together of the doctrine
of original sin and reprobation, with the doctrine of election,
seemed to these “spiritual reformers” to imperil moral seriousness,
and also to destroy the very foundation of mysticism : that inward
Divine Seed which in some mysterious way is present and active
within every soul. These “spiritual reformers” were also akin to
the sect-type in their insistence on the necessity for focusing fafth in
a simple, experimental, and tangible unity of thought, as originally
Luther also had desired to do, a desire which reappears indeed
in every fresh impulse towards inward and direct religious experi-
ence. It was, therefore, not merely the moralistic Anabaptist
movement which strove against the ecclesiastical and orthodox
tendency to develop this practical and simple heart of religion
into a doctrinal system ; 477 the Protestant mystics of that period
also threw all their influence into that effort.
476 This has given rise to the suggestion that various “spiritual reformers”
ought to be numbered among the Anti-Trinitarians, a group which in the
average history of doctrine is still continually presented to us, whose members,
however, belong to quite different connections, and which can only be gathered
together in this group from the external, heresiological point of view.
476 See p. 965. 477 See p. 965.
PROTESTANTISM
749
Through this criticism of doctrine, and through the appeal to
a permanent unchanging “Divine Ground” within the soul,
which is only quickened into life when it meets with the Bible and
the message of Christ, mysticism establishes another still closer
relationship, namely, the relationship with rationalism. We need,
however, merely to glance at the Humanistic theology, at Socirian-
ism and Deism, in order to notice the important distinction which,
for all that, still exists between mysticism and rationalism.
Several Humanistic ideas have crept in, as is quite clear in the
case of Sebastian Franck, Castellio, and Coornheert. But in
principle a great distinction remains. Mystical “enthusiasm” with
its constant “illuminations”, and divine “openings” and “com-
munications”, spiritual idealism with its asceticism, its rejection
of the “letter” and of the external knowledge of the senses, is still
at heart hostile to the spirit of scientific rationalism. Scientific
rationalism is more at home in the rational apologetic and
scholasticism of the churches, and genuine rationalists, like the
Socinians, preferred to remain within the churches, because
purely critical scientific theology has no fellowship principle of
its own. Where they were forced into a separatist attitude they
certainly did create their own communities, which, however,
were more like schools than religious fellowships of like-minded
people bound together in love. Nevertheless, this kind of spirit-
uality has many points of contact with the general intellectualist
spirit of rationalism; and when its mystical glow fades it easily
slips into it, as was the case with Spinoza, Edelmann, and a section
of the Deists.
Mysticism which draws its nourishment from the immediate
perception of the Presence of God, is a process which is repeated
everywhere and always in the same manner, and thus it comes
into touch with the autonomy and universal validity of scientific
thought. Both assimilate each other. Further, to the extent in
which mysticism of the Neo-Platonic type bases its experience on a
universal cosmic foundation, regarding it as the actualization of
the Divine Spark contained in every soul, mystical religion in
general becomes a process which completes itself in attaining to
the knowledge of God through the intellect, and the redemption
of the spirit through that knowledge. It thus leads to a Universal-
ism which recognizes in all the concrete positive religions that
fundamental process which arises from the essential relationship
between God and the finite. In spite of its reverence for the Bible
it still reduces the sense of difference between Christianity and
the other religions, and recognizes the Indwelling Christ also in
750 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the non-Christian faiths. It places the universal religious con-
sciousness which is interpreted as an inward necessity, over against
an active and personal faith, which has an objective historic basis.
In so doing, however, it leaves the realm of positive theology
and enters that of the universal philosophy of religion. With the
disappearance or decrease of the gulf between the Christian and
the non-Christian world this school of thought approaches the
system of comparative religion and criticism, for which Erasmus
had already prepared the way. It turns its attention, first of all
towards those elements in traditional theology and worship which
constitute the greatest stumbling-block to the mystic — against
the practice of isolating the Christian facts of salvation and making
them static, which is so uncongenial to the mystical thirst for
direct experience. The historic time-element and the magical sense-
element are willingly handed over to a more or less penetrating
criticism, and, in place of these elements, stress is laid upon the
timeless and universal element which Christianity contains. Thus
the full significance of this kind of spirituality does not emerge
until it appears in mystics like Franck, Coornheert, and Castellio,
who, together with their mysticism, had also imbibed the spirit
of Humanistic culture and criticism.
Finally, this movement exhibited a spirit of tolerance which
went far beyond the Anabaptist demands for toleration. In the
view of the “spiritual reformers” toleration did not consist in
merely refraining from forcible compulsion in religious matters,
coupled with the conviction that one’s own section of the Church
contains the whole and the sole Truth ; it was a spirit of religious
toleration which granted to each individual the actual right to
his own convictions; its outlook is relative, since in all that is
relative the Absolute is present. It was that relative conception
of Truth which was current neither in the churches nor in the
sects, and which alone completely eradicates the urgent desire
for the sole dominion of an absolute conception of Truth. Luther’s
strongly mystical statements about toleration sank into oblivion
because instinctively he would not and could not give up the
absolute conception of truth and Revelation. On the other hand,
the toleration preached by “spiritual reformers” did gain ground,
because it everywhere recognized Truth and Revelation in every
relative approach to the one Truth, which, ultimately, could
only be experienced in the present. Only among the “spiritual
reformers” was there liberty of conscience within the religious
community, whereas the sects and the Free Churches recognized
liberty of conscience only from the standpoint of the State, and
PROTESTANTISM 751
alongside of the ecclesiastical organizations. But in this respect
also this “spiritual” movement differs from strict rationalism,
which, with its absolute demand for the truth of its ideas, tends
rather towards intolerance, like the churches, and is only ready
to tolerate the opinions of others out of contempt and opportunism.
Real toleration was and is found only among those rationalists
who have steeped themselves at the same time in mystical and
“spiritual” ideas . 478
These conclusions, however, only represent the final develop-
ment of these ideas. Few of the “spiritual reformers” in early
Protestantism went as far as this. Their chief aim was simply to
breathe new life into the Christian movement, and to make it
active and effective ; most of them therefore did not go beyond a
Christ-mysticism of the type of St. Bernard. Schwenkfeld is the
leader, or at least the type, of most of them. The doctrine of
Original Sin, too, which increased the gulf of separation between
the Christian and the non-Christian world, was indeed forced into
the background by the idea of the “flesh”, and of that selfishness
which revealed itself in external matters; but the underlying
dualism was still rarely completely dissolved. These reflections are
only modern deductions from these ideas, which were certainly
latent within these doctrines, but which did not reveal their
significance until they were developed to their full logical
extent.
The early “spiritual reformers”, even the most radical, were
still very sure of their essentially Christian faith, and they particu-
larly liked to appeal to similar “spiritual” expressions of Luther’s
early period, when Luther, too, had expected everything from
the Spirit who is contained in the Word. Everything centres in
confidence in the Spirit, who, wherever He may be, is always the
Spirit of Christ, and who Himself will make humanity Christian.
Ecclesiastical differences are softened or even removed; but
Christianity itself was not drawn into this relative outlook ; these
results of a relative point of view were still only latent. The outward
Church has been dissolved, but the inward Church and the sup-
port which it provides still exists. The main interest of these
thinkers is not intellectual but emotional. They hold that the
religious spirit is not produced by criticism of doctrine and of
the Bible, but by the opposite method. The starting-point of all
criticism is the need for direct experience, the ethical seriousness
and the sociological standpoint of the mystic or the “spiritual”
man. Doctrines, so far as they are opposed to this, or which have
478 See p. 965.
752 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
become unnecessary for the emotions, certainly come under its
criticism, which is further strengthened by Humanistic and other
forms of criticism. The main interest, however, is religious, and
the whole relative element is felt to be a possible point of view
within the Christian position. This main religious and Christian
tendency could not be destroyed until it came under the influence
of modern natural science, and of the new philosophical systems
which were erected upon this foundation. Only since then has this
type of spirituality been fused with a really rational “universal
Theism ”. 479
The Ethic of “Spiritual Religion”
The ethic of this “spiritual religion” also is peculiar. It is an
ethic which aims at holiness and at perfection, and it reproaches
the churches particularly for their ethical laxity and their effortless
acceptance of the objective aspect of Christianity in their faith
in the vicarious removal of the curse of sin by the Death of
Christ. At this point “spiritual religion” seems to come very close
to the sect, and often enough it has been fused with it. It has points
of contact also with the Catholic ethic, which therefore it often
praises more highly than the Protestant ethic. This “spiritual”
ethic of sanctification, however, is quite differently interpreted
from that of the sect. Its ideal is the untrammelled freedom of the
Spirit; not control, community discipline, and the strictness of
the law of the Sermon on the Mount. It was just at this point,
too, that this school of thought came into contact with Luther,
and it was fond of appealing to his earlier expressions of opinion.
In the moral sphere, also, the freedom of the Spirit is paramount.
Here again there is nothing literal and nothing external. Within
this movement there was a strong sense, it is true, of deep opposi-
tion to the world, a hatred of the carnal and selfish worldly temper ;
in this respect it was much closer to the ascetic ideal than were
the churches. As a movement, however, it lacked that other ele-
ment of asceticism, the legalistic spirit and the practice of regular
discipline. It recognized a method of degrees in the life of com-
munion with God, and of self-discipline for the aim of “deification”,
but it felt no need of a moral purification with a supernatural
end in view, or of a gradual process of sanctification which proves
the existence of a “state of grace”. This form of spirituality is
as remote from the sober and legal spirit of Calvinism and of
Puritanism as it is from that of the Anabaptists and the Mennon-
479 See p. 966.
PROTESTANTISM
753
ites. When it did take root in Puritanism (as in Dell and Francis
Rous) it appealed to Luther and to Catholic literature. Further,
there is at this point a distinct difference between Calvinistic
and Lutheran mysticism. Tersteegen considered Count Zinzen-
dorf superficial; the latter represented more logically the ethic
of this mystical spirituality. The goal of this movement is an
immanent, free happiness, which does good quite spontaneously,
and which is as little bound to the conventions of men as it is to
the moral law of the Bible. Nor has the idea of the natural moral
law any special significance for this school of thought. Its followers
prefer to speak of the Inner Light, of the Illuminated Reason,
of conscience as identical with the revelation of Christ which
awakens it to life. The primary aim of this ethic of freedom is
the enjoyment and practical proof of personal salvation. The
outpouring of the Divine Love upon the brethren is only something
additional, though it is strongly and particularly emphasized.
Religion is placed above ethics. It is perfectly natural, therefore,
that problems of secular morality, of the State, of Society, and of
economics are regarded as unimportant ; in fact they are actually
treated with entire indifference. Wherever people attempted to
solve these problems in smaller groups they either formed
societies on the model of the family or the cloister, or they assimil-
ated certain features of the sect ; every ethical experiment, indeed,
brought the “spiritual reformers” into closer relation with the
sect-type, with which they were already on the verge of fusion
at many points. In actual practice both of these religious types
were constantly merging into each other. The sect aspired to the
inwardness of mysticism ; mysticism strove to actualize the sacred
fellowship of the sect. “Enthusiasm” — the result of great excite-
ment and of the oppressive hostility of the churches — also played
its part in drawing both these groups closer together. But incon-
sistencies and tensions, due to this partial fusion of the two types,
still remained . 480
This general description must now be supplemented by con-
crete examples. In so doing we are as little concerned with a new
presentation of the subject-matter as we were in dealing with the
sect ; our one aim is to shed light upon the sociological significance
and social influence of particular groups, in which their opposition
to the group-fellowship and the social ethic of the Church becomes
plain.
480 See p. 967.
VOL. II.
754
THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF *THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Thomas Munzer
Thomas Munzer is the first instance of this pronounced opposi-
tion to the Protestant church-type. At first he shared Luther’s
views, but from the outset he was influenced by the mystical
writings recommended by Luther, and he was also conversant
with Joachimite literature. Further, while he was pastor in
Zwickau, he came under the influence of the conventicles which
existed in that town, and he imbibed their idea of a fresh outpour-
ing of “spiritual gifts” before the swiftly approaching End of the
World. His theology consisted of the mystical doctrine of passive
deification, and the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, revealing His
presence independently within the soul, merely stimulated and
authenticated by the Word; this view he combined with the
Zwickau fanaticism. From the outset also he united with this
doctrine the ideal of establishing an exclusive community of
mystical adepts and of the elect ; this ideal was broadened until
it included ideas of communistic social reform. It seems probable
that this later development was due to the influence of Hussite
and Taborite ideas, because when Munzer was driven out of
Zwickau he went to Bohemia, where he hoped to realize his
ideals. This hope, however, was doomed to disappointment.
From that time he developed still more strongly the idea that,
since in these latter days the authorities had failed, it had now
become the imperative duty of the laity to use violence in order
to realize the ideal of the perfect spiritual community. From the
same standpoint also he deduced the rejection of Infant Baptism,
on the ground that external sacramental ordinances belong to
“the flesh”. Munzer did not belong to the Anabaptists. It is true
that the Zurich Anabaptist movement which had just come into
existence welcomed him, but its members warned him against the
use of violence, and they blamed him for laying so little emphasis
upon Believers’ Baptism.
Munzer represents a reawakening of mystical ideas combined
with fanatical Hussite and Taborite revolutionary ideas. This com-
bination, however, was merely accidental ; it did not represent
a real fusion of these various elements. It can only be explained
by the character and destiny of this restless man, who was always
eager for peculiar and spectacular activities. In the end the waves
of the Peasants’ War engulfed him. The so-called “Zwickau
Fanatics” are also connected with Munzer, through his residence
in Zwickau. These men, however, are of no special importance
for our inquiry, save that of being representatives of “spiritual
PROTESTANTISM
755
enthusiasm”, and the “spiritual” criticism of the sacraments, in
the sense of an excited religion of the common people which was
nourished by fragments of mysticism . 481
Karlstadt
The mysticism of Karlstadt was far more important and
influential. It led to a passionate disagreement with Luther, who
clipped the wings of his former colleague first of all by exile, and
then by internment in a place where he was kept under observa-
tion, until at last Karlstadt fled to Switzerland, and thus gained
his freedom. Karlstadt also could not accept the doctrine that
salvation consists in the mere acceptance of the forgiveness of
sins by the soul which has trembled before the awful majesty of
the Law on the bare authority of the Word, and its proclamation
by the ministers of Christ. He also, after the manner of the mystics,
conceived salvation to be a gradual process leading upwards from
self-emptying to complete conformity with the Will of God. In
his view this sanctification was to be realized not merely on the
bare authority of the Word of Scripture, but rather by the free
inward movement of the Spirit which is merely aroused and
controlled by the Scriptures. Moreover, he felt that the genuine
character of the purely inward process ought to be recognized by
its practical results, by the ethic of love and self-sacrifice made
possible through spiritual conformity with the Will of God. This
led him — in line with the true mystical tradition — to exalt the
“spirit” above the “letter” ; to a “spiritual” criticism of the sacra-
ments; to the idea of a lay-religion of spiritually enlightened
souls, who are to be shepherded by particularly gifted spiritual
men^ recognized and approved as such by the whole “illuminated”
group; to the free formation of congregations exercising their
individual choice of such a “spiritual” man as their pastor; and
to a strong emphasis upon the practical results of conformity to
the Mind and Will of God; through these ideas he came into
contact with the social reform movements of his own day. In this
instance, as a result of his contact with these ideas of social reform,
mysticism seemed to be approaching the ideal of the sect. In
reality Karlstadt’s main concern, however, was not with the ethic
of the Sermon on the Mount, but with the spirituality of self-
negation, not with Adult Baptism as the sign of mature Church-
membership, but with a “spiritual” explanation of the sacraments ;
481 Cf. the article on Miinzer by Kolde: PRE . 8 , Gottfried Arnold , //, 14-17 , with
the characteristic expression of opinion: “Even although at the beginning
he may without doubt at times have received grace from God, yet Nature
retained the upper hand’* (K. Muller: KG ., II, 310-326 ).
756 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
not with the formation of a “holy community”, but with the
gathering together of individuals who are freely moved by the
Spirit, for whom all visible fellowship is a merely external matter.
Although he withdrew from co-operation with Mtinzer, yet, later
on, he did not join the Anabaptists.
Karlstadt laid down his spiritual offices and dignities at a time
when everyone was still making ecclesiastical experiments, for
he wished to form a community at Orlamimde which in itself
would not have been wholly against Luther’s earlier principles.
Luther, however, was alienated from Karlstadt on the following
points : Karlstadt replaced the doctrine of justification by faith
by the doctrine of the degrees of salvation ; he set the freedom of
the Spirit in contrast to the Word ; he linked the demand for
practical proof of the reality of the inner life with the demand for
social reform, and, above all, he assailed the rights of the patron.
Luther’s passionate hatred regarded Karlstadt simply as
another comrade of Miinzer, and a muddle-headed fool. So he
drove him into misery and want, from which the Swiss churches,
with their more lenient views of mysticism, rescued him. The
conflict was, however, not a personal one; it was purely objective.
It meant that an essentially individualistic, irreconcilable form
of mysticism (which, moreover, had incidentally come into touch
with the democratic reform tendencies of the small Communes),
stood out in opposition to Luther’s idea of a mediated salvation,
bound up with an objective authority, which, for that reason,
was capable of leading to an ecclesiastical organization. Other-
wise, however, Karlstadt tried to unite the “Word” and the
“Spirit” just as Luther had tried to do in his early days; Zwingli
also had made the same experiment. This is why the problem
was never really solved. The only result of the controversy was
that Luther coined some decisive polemical formulas which
came into permanent use . 482
ScHWENKFELD
The doctrine of Schwenkfeld, and his organization of con-
venticles, marks a distinct step forward. Schwenkfeld was a most
delightful man, and one of Luther’s noblest followers and most
spiritual colleagues in the cause of reform; his “spiritual religion”
always remained moderately ecclesiastical. He had been influenced
by the teaching of Luther’s early period, and also by German
mysticism, particularly by Tauler. Later he came into touch
with Karlstadt, and with the Basel and Zurich Reformers who
482 See p. 968.
PROTESTANTISM
757
were very sympathetic towards mystical ideas. The impulse to
his particular form of mysticism arose out of his evangelistic work
in Silesia, where he discovered the hopelessness of a people’s
church which was simply a mass of baptized individuals ; his desire
was to combine Luther’s “spiritual” idea of an inner circle with
the Scriptural primitive conception of a society for worship
endowed with spiritual gifts. In order to achieve this end the
merely objective “Word” was insufficient ; what was needed was
the quickening Spirit, as distinct from the “Word”, whose presence
can be felt, and its reality proved by its fruits. Accordingly
Schwenkfeld’s idea was that of the present inner activity of the
converting and renewing Spirit of God, and the absolute necessity
of practical religious and ethical fruits to prove the reality of this
activity. In order to protect the inner movement of the Spirit
from dissolving into a purely psychological process, like Luther he
laid the most vigorous emphasis upon predestination and the
self- witness of the Spirit as true in the elect. He admitted that the
inward activity of the Spirit is mediated through the objective
authority of the Word and of preaching to the extent that he
regarded the Word or the Bible only as a vessel which contained
a deposit of inner spiritual experience, and he admitted its impor-
tance in kindling a similar inward spiritual movement, like that
out of which it had itself arisen. The Bible was also useful as a
standard by which the inner working of the Spirit could be tested.
He also accepted the doctrine of the Atonement through the Death
of Christ, but in this he laid all the emphasis upon the appropria-
tion and imitation of this “dying of Jesus” through the absolutely
real indwelling of the Exalted Christ within the elect.
To*Schwenkfeld salvation did not consist in faith in the validity
of the Gospel proclaimed by the Church, nor in the salvation
which the Church holds in trust for humanity, but in a personal
direct Christ-mysticism of dying and rising again with Christ.
This belief led him to emphasize very strongly the great differ-
ence between the “letter”, the “flesh”, and the “creature”, and
the directly Divine element in life, the Spirit, the inward result
of “election”. Above all, he deduced from all this the idea of
the Divine Christ whose Nature must not be stained with any
“creaturely” element at all, for even His human Body from the
very beginning of creation was a spiritual and supernatural Body.
This remarkable dogma formulated by Schwenkfeld, which is
connected with speculations of the ancient patristic mystical type,
and which also gives form and substance to the mystical idea of
the process of salvation, was, in reality, only an attempt to express
758 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
his desire to erppty the idea of Christ of all historical content
while retaining the Christological dogma.
One result of this doctrine was to empty of meaning the external
sacraments. At the most they might possibly be regarded as
outward tokens of the spiritual fullness which was already present.
Therefore, in spite of the fact that Schwenkfeld rejected Infant
Baptism, and that he happened to be on friendly terms with the
Anabaptists, inwardly he held himself aloof from their movement.
The only baptism which he could admit was the Baptism of the
Spirit ; the only law, that which works through the Spirit, the only
religious community, that which Christ Himself has brought into
being, conventicles endowed with spiritual gifts and ruled by
the Spirit, which, while they may continually change their form,
are the leaven and the salt working within the visible churches.
In Schwenkfeld’s theory these conventicles were to be smaller
groups of genuine communicants, which were to be kept as pure
as possible by means of discipline. The Primitive Apostolic Church
has passed away; it soon became formal, and from the time of
Constantine it became purely secular. The visible Church, which
has been in existence since that time, and which at the present
day is divided into four sections : Baptist, Lutheran, Zwinglian,
and Anabaptist, may continue to exist as an auxiliary institution
for the protection and furtherance of the true Church, the spiritual
community of those who have been truly “born of the Spirit”.
Connection with the State is an evil; force in religious matters
is wholly unchristian. The conventicles are persecuted because
they oppose the spirit of the world. Only an apostle obviously
raised up by God, or the Return of Christ, will make it a final
organization, or lead it to victory. Here again we see hofa the
Chiliast idea always springs up afresh when there is a clash
between universal hope and actual failure. This conception of the
Church was certainly sharply opposed to the idea of a Church
composed of those “born again through baptism” proclaimed by
the Lutheran preachers, who were only thinking of a church in
terms of a mass movement. This is why it aroused in Luther such
intense anger that he soon made it totally impossible for “Stenk-
feld” to live in any Lutheran country. Schwenkfeld was to share
the fate of Karlstadt . 483 In a wandering life of self-imposed exile
from his homeland of Silesia, protected mainly by aristocratic
members of his own class of society, Schwenkfeld created con-
venticles which consisted of believers united by ties of personal
fellowship who shared in the life of the churches but abstained
488 See p. 968.
PROTESTANTISM
759
from the use of the sacraments, waiting for the settlement of this
vexed question by the Protestant leaders.
In many respects Schwenkfeld reminds us of Zinzendorf; but
Schwenkfeld was much nearer to true mysticism than Zinzendorf.
Schwenkfeld’s ideal was that of smaller groups within the churches
who are to be guided and built up in the faith by a truly “con-
verted” preacher, who, naturally, will be really effective; this
pastor may, of course, be a layman. Like the Moravians and the
Methodists at a later date, his followers were forced by persecu-
tion to form independent communities of their own. Only a few
groups survived these persecutions, and in Silesia, towards the
end of the sixteenth century, they united with the Baptists. After
1720 the few who remained fled from oppression to England,
Holland, and America.
Schwenkfeld’s ideal may be broadly described as a union of
the sectarian principle with mysticism ; it was, however, influenced
less by the sectarian and mystical tradition than by Lutheran,
Scriptural, and Patristic ideas. It is non-ecclesiastical, with a
supra-confessional outlook, but it also recognizes and uses the
churches as the outward means of preparation for making the
world Christian. The real rebirth of the Church is still to come,
and pure conventicles are only a preparation for that consumma-
tion. But this rebirth will be a work of Divine miraculous power
and the outpouring of the Spirit before the End.
The influence of these ideas was great and widespread. Nearly
all the “spiritual reformers” show traces of its influence, and the
English Congregationalists in particular can possibly only be
explained from this point of view, even though their outlook was
also’strongly coloured by Calvinism.
Weigel
Valentine Weigel, a disciple of Schwenkfeld, at a later date
carried the mystical element a step farther, at least in one of its
aspects. Weigel despised the mere externals of religion to such an
extent that all his life he passed for an orthodox Lutheran pastor.
It was only after his death that his writings made known to a
horrified world his view that salvation was bound up entirely
with purely inward, directly personal movements of the Spirit.
He developed the purely philosophical foundations of mysticism
in a very logical way, the idealistic conception of the idea of God
in humanity. His ideas, therefore, are more significant for philo-
sophy than for Church History. 4833
483a See p. 970.
76o THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Although the mysticism of Schwenkfeld remained within the
borders of the Church, making a distinct effort to establish a
relationship with the specific organized Christian communities,
it went far beyond these limits in the most important and inde-
pendent representatives of this school of thought. It became an
entirely individualistic principle, akin to the critical Rationalism
of the Humanists. Its spokesmen were distinctly hostile to the
Reformation, which was beginning to settle down as an objective
ecclesiastical organization. This is why the Reform movement
regarded this type of religion as its most dangerous enemy, and
pursued it with such deadly hatred and persecution. The chief
leaders in this movement are Sebastian Franck, Sebastian
Castellio, and Dirck Coornheert, alongside of Erasmus and the
Reformers (Reformatoren ) .
Sebastian Franck
The most original member of this group was Luther’s contem-
porary, Sebastian Franck. Greatly distressed by the sterility of
the new teaching, by the impossibility of making men good simply
through the proclamation of the Word, and by the inconsistency
of a concrete ecclesiastical holiness which gave up all idea of
subjective results, he resigned his post as a Lutheran pastor, and
lived as a literary prophet of the sole redeeming power of the
Spirit and of the Inward Word, supporting himself at the same
time, like Paul, by the work of his hands. To him the central
point of the whole of Christianity came to be summed up in the
inward power of the Spirit, expressed in the terms of mediaeval
mysticism, ascending through the different degrees from self-
renunciation and detachment to the heights of ecstasy and deifica-
tion. This power of the Spirit must then issue in the practical
ethic of self-conquest and brotherly love ; beyond that the State
and Society must be left as they are, since God permits them to
exist. In Franck’s experience there are few genuine Christians
with a personal experience, and most of these are scattered about
all over the world without any cohesion or connection with each
other, united only in the Spirit, and mutually recognizing each
other through the voice of the Spirit. A Church does exist of those
who have been led by the spirit in a marvellous manner into
communion with God. This Church, however, is present to faith
alone ; it has no external form of worship, no external bond, no
outward means of grace and no mere authority of the “letter”.
This Invisible Church is created by God alone. The very spirit
which brings it forth, however, is a spiritual movement arising
PROTESTANTISM
761
from the centre of the soul, from the immanence of God in the
creature, from the Divine Seed and Spark in man; everywhere
it is the same, since it arises out of the subconscious sphere, and
harmonizes with the Spirit of Christ. This is the Logos or the
Indwelling Christ, whose spirit is poured out upon all flesh, and
it identifies all genuine piety with the Christian faith, which is
visibly represented by the Incarnation of the Logos. The only
advantage of the Christian revelation is that it is able to offer this
universal, unchangeable substance of truth in a complete manner,
since through the Scriptural tradition it is summed up in Jesus,
who was filled with the Spirit, and in the Biblical writers, and it
is from this source that the Spirit within us is quickened into life.
This, however, only takes place where the inner spiritual Spark
goes out in search and longing to meet the incarnation of the
Spirit in the Scriptures. The Spirit alone can interpret the Bible,
which represents in an allegorical manner the eternal inward
truths of spiritual experience in the form of the historic myths of
the Fall and Redemption; otherwise the Bible in its literal form
is something completely human and historical which can only be
quickened into life by the Spirit. This point of view leads Franck
to a Theism which is expressed in the terms of the universal history
of religion; it recognizes only an eternal and unchanging sub-
stance of truth, along with an allegorical interpretation of Scrip-
ture which is ever on the watch for the transformation of general
conceptions into historic myths. This, again, leads to a universal
philosophy of history, which interprets the whole of history in
terms of an ever-recurring conflict between a faith which is
directed towards invisible, spiritual, and disinterested aims, and
an uftbelief which is bound up with visible, external, and selfish
aims. Franck is, therefore, completely indifferent to churches,
parties, or sects. In his view a new Reformation is unnecessary,
since every reformation only produces a new Church. Of course,
if a spiritual prophet were to arise, obviously sent by God, he
might possibly be the leader of a new movement. But so long as
such a leader does not appear all that can be done is to maintain
an unsectarian, independent, purely personal, and individualistic
type of Christianity, of sanctification and brotherly love, with
no outward ceremonial and no external authority. Franck believes
that the ultimate stage in the history of Christianity will be
reached when churches and sects disappear, and the Invisible
Church, the “community of the Spirit”, will alone remain in
every land, to serve as the spiritual “salt of the earth”. This last
idea is evidently a modified adaptation of Schwenkfeld’s idea of
762 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
a coming Reformation through an “apostolic man”, possessing
Divine credentials ; it also means that in the coming outpouring
of the Spirit the Church will play no part ; the whole expectation
is “purely spiritual” in character. In this doctrine Franck comes
very near to the old mystical doctrine of the evangelium aeternum or
the Third Era. From the point of view of his contemporaries these
views made him an impossible person. Everywhere he was an
outcast; finally he disappeared, leaving no trace. Through his
writings, however, he continued to exercise a living influence in
Holland and in England . 484
Castellio
Just as Franck was the critic of Lutheranism, so Castellio was
the critic of Calvinism. As an outstanding Christian-Humanist
and Principal of the College he seemed destined to become the
Melancthon of Geneva. But a difference of opinion in Biblical
criticism separated him from Calvin, who was the dominating
theological authority of that period. From that time forward the
great task of Castellio’s life was the protection of personal freedom
of conviction as the palladium of a genuine Christian Reformation.
As the friend of Occhino and David Joris, and as an admirer of
the Theologia Germanica , Castellio based his convictions upon the
spiritual and mystical doctrine of the power of the Holy Spirit,
through which alone the Bible can be rightly understood, and its
vital power experienced, apart from all human effort. He also
shared the views of those who taught the doctrine of the degrees
of the interior life, from detachment and death to self, up to the
sphere in which the Spirit of Christ is in full control. He rejected
the doctrine of imputed righteousness, and taught that forgiveness
of sins springs out of the Heart of God, who reveals Himself
through the Spirit, and who can only be conceived as angry and
unreconciled by defiant and unilluminated souls. At the same time
his mysticism was strongly tinged with moral and active ideas,
and verged on an ethical Rationalism. Castellio was, however,
never an Erasmian; his whole outlook was that of a “spiritual
reformer”. His view of the Bible (which in his immense industry
he translated into Latin and French) coincided with that of
Sebastian Franck. Although he believed in the inspiration of the
Bible, his philological and critical attitude towards the Bible was
both inwardly free and amazingly bold. This was due to his
theory that the Spirit alone can interpret the Scriptures, for He
alone can recognize His Presence in the inner inspiration of the
484 See p. 970.
PROTESTANTISM
7^3
writers of the actual text. Above all, after the burning of Servetus,
Gastellio fought for the principle of the relative character of all
the outward forms of the Spirit, which, however, does not in itself
destroy the identity of the Spirit. He became one of the great
early champions of religious toleration based on spiritual and
mystical ideas. He supported his point of view by appealing to
the teaching of Luther’s earlier period, and to Sebastian Franck, to
the theory of the separation between the temporal and the spiritual
authority; in his view the spiritual authority may use no other
weapons than those of the Word and the Spirit, in entire depen-
dence upon their final and purely spiritual victory. This is not
the toleration of scepticism or of opportunism, but the tolerant
spirit of mysticism, which regards every kind of dogmatic formula-
tion as merely approximate knowledge. Through these views he
hoped to overcome the horrible physical cruelty and the moral
unfruitfulness and dogmatic externalism of the Reformation.
We cannot now discover on what grounds he believed it would
be possible, under these circumstances, to maintain a popular and
national Church, whose existence he accepted without hesitation.
Apparently he believed in the invincibility of the Spirit, in the
possibility of a dogmatic simplification which would unite all
Christians, and he regarded excommunication or exclusion from
the community (which he also desired in the interest of ethics)
as a measure which need rarely be used. In any case he did not
accept present conditions in the resigned spirit of Schwenkfeld,
nor did he share his eschatological expectations. Living in the
little town of Basel he may have felt that such an ethical simplifica-
tion and spiritualization of the whole Church would be possible ;
influenced as he was by Humanism, too, his ethic was more
suited to practical life than that of Schwenkfeld or Franck. His
enemies at Geneva, however, saw clearly how dangerous these
“relative” ideas would be to the idea of a Church of the people
with the infallible authority which such a Church would need.
They denounced his idea of the victory of the Spirit and of the
Word as “fantastic”, pointing out that we must not reckon on
miracles taking place, for “we do not relieve the starving by look-
ing for the intervention of angels, but we make suitable provision
for them ourselves”.
Castellio, meanwhile, had taken refuge in Basel ; his opponents
tried to make his life there impossible, but they were unsuccessful.
After his death both his published and his unpublished writings
were used afresh in the struggles of the Remonstrants, and, like
the writings. of Franck in the Netherlands, they exercised an
764 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
influence which they were unable to exert during the lifetime of
their author . 486
COORNHEERT
The important Dutch Humanist and politician, Coornheert,
represented a point of view similar to that of Castellio. He wished
to translate all Castellio’s writings, and he actually translated a
certain number of them. At the time when he lived and worked,
ecclesiastical conditions in the Netherlands were still unsettled.
This was the period when the Baptist communities, which have
already been mentioned, were being reorganized. Coornheert
urged on his contemporaries the need for a Christianity of the
“Inner Word”, which would reveal its reality in practical life.
Entirely rejecting the idea of forming any kind of new Church,
Coornheert wished to do away with all denominations and parties
within the Church, and to retain no doctrinal basis beyond that
of the Bible and the Apostles’ Creed. At the same time he did not
accept the literalist attitude of the Baptists towards the Scriptures ;
his one desire was to make way for the free inward dominion of
the Spirit, who alone can open men’s minds to understand the
Scriptures, and who witnesses to His presence within the hearts
of men by the fruits of tranquillity, self-sacrifice, and brotherly
love. He urged that the presence of the Spirit and of the Indwelling
Christ ought to be manifest in everyday practical life, and that
it should be actually realized in its utmost perfection. The Spirit
Himself can convey the forgiveness of sins, and there is no need
to refer to the supposed connection between the forgiveness of
sins and the historic fact of the Atoning Death of Christ. This
Indwelling Christ reaches out far beyond the actual borders
of Christendom, since, apart from the Scriptures, the Logos has
brought new light and life to many souls in the non-Christian
world.
In all these ideas Coornheert’s mysticism, like that of Castellio,
has strongly marked rationalistic and practical features; he has
no desire to probe into the deeper mysteries of the Trinity or of
Christology ; he wishes only to see them made effective. Although
he approved of the simplification of the Gospel proposed by
Erasmus, he differed from him in his definitely Protestant doctrine
of Grace, in his mystical strain, and in his entire repudiation
of the visible Church. Otherwise, however, like Erasmus and
Castellio, he made the Christian ethic harmonize with that of
the Stoics, and in so doing he modified their “spiritual” Dualism.
485 See p. 971.
PROTESTANTISM
765
Under these circumstances his attitude towards the ecclesiastical
organizations of his own day, and to the whole idea of a com-
munity bound together by a common form of worship, is particu-
larly characteristic. Like Franck he rejects the whole idea of a
reformation and of the establishment of a purified Church, since
he believes that the visible Church is inherently wrong. At the
same time he holds that it is quite possible to take part outwardly
in the old forms of worship, since a bad form of worship does not
make a man bad, nor a purified form make a man good. It is
possible to take part in everything and yet to remain inwardly
independent and remote from it all. It is, however, also possible
to take the other line, and to live in a spirit of pure inward holi-
ness and brotherly love, apart from sacraments and external
worship. Like Schwenkfeld and Franck he will only admit the
possibility that a new Church might arise if a prophet were to
appear endowed by God with supernatural powers . 486 He does
not believe that he himself is called to be that prophet any more
than any of the Reformers. Nor does he recognize this man of
God in the visionaries of his day, like David Joris and Heinrich
Niklaes. In case Christians may still think they need some form
of fellowship, however, he outlines a programme of fellowship
which is certainly most peculiar. Faith is to be based simply
upon the Bible and the Apostles’ Creed, and it should be urged,
above all, to prove its truth in practical life. These groups, formed
on a free and voluntary basis, are to receive as members those
who accept this very simple form of faith, and who avoid the
grosser forms of sin. For the sake of the weaker brethren it is
permissible to make a rule that obstinate and hardened sinners,
and # all who oppose the Glory of God, should be avoided ; this,
however, should be done without splitting hairs over trifles, and
without censoriousness. For the sake of the weaker brethren, the
sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper may be observed
as outward signs of the New Birth, but all in complete freedom.
There is no authoritative teaching ministry, but only exhortation
from the Scriptures for edification. These congregations should
be quite free, and no one should be compelled to join them.
This whole scheme seems to be a modified and rationalized
form of Schwenkfeld’s ideal ; indeed, in many particulars it
resembles it very closely. It is, indeed, a highly Utopian Church-
programme; if it had ever been put into practice it would
have led to interminable “splits” in the different congregations.
486 See Hegler, pp. 256 ff. As already in Franck this idea also reappears in
Coornheert, especially against the Anabaptists.
766 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Indeed, it could only have been carried out in the spirit of Castellio,
and of Luther in his early days, through confidence in the spon-
taneous power of the Holy Spirit to unite men’s hearts in love.
Thus it is not surprising that its practical influence was slight,
and that it did not arrest the development of ecclesiastical
organization in the Netherlands. 487
The Collegiants
The later influence of Coornheert can only be clearly discerned
in the movement known as the Collegiants, or the Rynsburgers.
Their position was peculiar ; they represent a kind of half-way
house between a Free Church (or sect) organization, and a purely
individualistic mystical fellowship of kindred souls. Outwardly
they were obliged to belong to the Baptist denomination, although
they had no desire to encourage the establishment of a Baptist
Church; when a number of Remonstrants joined the move-
ment it became strongly tinged with rationalism. Pre-eminently,
however, the movement bore the impress of the idealism and
mysticism of Coornheert.
The Nineteen Articles of Galenus Abrahams and Spruyt (about
1650) declare that the Apostolic Church, with its obviously
miraculous gifts, had long been extinct. They can discover no
command in the Bible to attempt to erect it once more “solely
by means of the Scriptures which are all that is left”, and they
find no encouragement in the new churches, since they are all
(including the Mennonites) divided by constant controversy. A
prophet who can be compared with the apostolic teachers, and
whose mission is attested by signs and wonders, has not appeared ;
thus there is no possibility of restoring the Church at the present
time. Therefore they declare that their Society is a purely human
institution, instituted without Divine commandment or Divine
authority. They base their whole confidence on the hope “that
the Great Father of the Family will still be pleased with it, and
that, in so far as their efforts are made in good faith, He will
regard it graciously out of the depths of His Infinite Mercy”. They
believe, therefore, that in the churches of their own day the office
of the ministry, the various forms of service, the ritual, the work
of teaching, and the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper
“do not possess the same value as in the Early Church”. The
most that can be said for them is that “they are permissible if
they are exercised without any claim to authority, in all lowliness,
with patience and endeavours to rectify them, without any
487 See p. 972.
PROTESTANTISM
767
attempt to bind men’s consciences very closely to this doctrine
and to the observance of the same”. Provided due care is exercised,
“Believers’ Baptism and the Lord’s Supper may still be observed
with profit”. The real truth, however, lies in a “pure inwardness”
of spirit and in the Invisible Church. A more detailed declaration
of 1659 says that “at the present time, when the visible Church
is decaying, among many nations, there are believers, who turn
away with their whole heart from all discord and from all
sectarianism ; who in the midst of divisions possess an undivided
heart, built up as a united body upon the one and only founda-
tion, even upon Christ Himself, completely one in the ground
and the power of God”. As in Coornheert himself, these senti-
ments are a clear echo of the ideas of Schwenkfeld, although
they have been somewhat altered. The only elements which are
missing are Schwenkfeld’s pronounced supernaturalism, sub-
stantial mysticism, and his eschatology. 4873
Mystical Ideas and the Baptists
It is also well known that a section of the Baptists adopted
mystical ideas, and on that account both groups have often been
identified with each other. These ideas, however, were only held
by individual Baptist theologians and their followers. In itself
the Baptist Movement was non-theological and needed nothing
beyond the Bible. When, however, the more reflective minds
within this movement studied the theological ideas which the
Bible contains, there was certainly aroused in them a sense of
need for a firmer basis and for clearer conclusions which opened
the cjpor to a more spiritual religion, as soon as men wished to
escape from the crude literal meaning or the inconsistencies of
the Bible. Then, too, the fanaticism which arose in times of perse-
cution, when men tried to justify their “new revelations” by pro-
claiming that the new situation was the beginning of the End of
the World, by the very fact that in making these statements it
had advanced beyond the literalist interpretation of Scripture,
had formed a bridge which led to a more “spiritual religion”. In
themselves, however, fanatical Anabaptists and spiritual mystics
still differed greatly from one another. On the other hand,
mystical thinkers who wished for religious fellowship could not
find it in the churches, so they sought for it in the ethical lay-
religion of the Baptists. Franck, for example, made this experi-
ment at one stage of his career.
4478 See p. 972.
768 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Hans Denk
This was also true of one of the most human and attractive
personalities of the age of the Reformation, Hans Denk. He was
a disciple of Tauler, of the Theologia Germanica and of Humanism;
yet, as principal of a school at Nurnberg, having come under the
influence of Karlstadt, Miinzer, and Staupitz, he could no longer
agree with the Lutheran ecclesiastical doctrine, which he re-
proached for its ethical sterility, and its rigid depreciation of
the individual in comparison with the reconciling grace which
belongs to the Church.*
Henceforward Denk led the life of a fugitive and a wanderer,
which seemed the appointed destiny of souls of this type. For a
time he was in communion with the Baptists ; in the end, however,
he left them also, commending himself wholly to the redeeming
power of the Inward Word, and of the Eternal Christ, who every-
where inwardly creates His Church, among circumcised and un-
circumcised, Catholics, Zwinglians, and Lutherans, if only one
will allow oneself to be led by the Spirit into quietness of spirit
and brotherly love. In his view, Christ and the Bible are the Spirit-
filled means by which the inner “Seed” or “Spark” is quickened
into life. God carries out His work of redemption through the
kindling of this “Spark”, which is everywhere latent in every
soul, and has to be fostered by the surrendered will; Christ can
only be described as “Redeemer” in so far as he sets these inward
processes in motion. But in order that Christ may do this, the
Spirit must already be in man. It is only because the Divine Spirit
in man meets the Divine Spirit in the Bible that redemption
becomes a fact which triumphs over externalism, the flesh, selfish-
ness, and worldliness, leading to the love of God and the brethren
as the sign and seal of every genuine experience of salvation.
It was because he held these views so strongly that Denk
opposed the externalism which clung to the contradictory
“letter” of Scripture, the substitutionary theory of the Atonement,
the exclusive limitation of salvation to the historic Christ, the
division of men into the two groups of the elect and the damned,
as a denial of the Divine source of souls, the current exaggerations
of the doctrine of sin, the division of man’s final destiny into heaven
and hell, ecclesiastical Christology and the ecclesiastical ethic
which compromises with the world. He admitted the necessity
for the State, but he counselled Christians against accepting
* That is, “grace” as a doctrine was exalted almost at the expense of the
individual. — Translator’s Note.
PROTESTANTISM
769
official positions under the State. Hatzer, Bunderlin, and Entfelder
held similar views. They were disciples of Denk, and, together
with him, they influenced Sebastian Franck. Theobald Thamer’s
position was peculiar; he interpreted the Spirit in terms of the
natural conscience or the natural moral law, a remarkable
anticipation of the transformation of Christian thought into
moralistic Deism which took place two centuries later . 488
Mystical Natural Philosophers
The mystical natural philosophers of that period, Ludovico
Vives, Campanus and Servetus, Agrippa of Nettesheim and
Paracelsus, enter far more deeply into the Neo-Platonic and
natural philosophical argument for the Spirit, and of the struggle
between the flesh and the spirit. From the religious point of view,
they all represent an inwardness of temper which is indifferent
to the churches, and a mystical love which overcomes selfishness ;
most of them also remained within the Catholic Church, but their
main influence was exercised among Protestant mystics. Servetus,
in particular, in his revival of the Gnostic elements in the Bible
and their connection with Neo-Platonic speculations, was one
of the most interesting and brilliant thinkers of the day. To some
extent Sebastian Franck also had been influenced by all these
thinkers.
Bohme, Gichtel, and Others
The theosophy of Jacob Bohme, too, was founded on impressions
received from Paracelsus, Schwenkfeld, and Weigel; from the
religious point of view it was essentially mystical and combined
with* an orthodox reverence for the sacraments of the Church.
Gichtel, Poiret, van Helmont, and Fludd (both father and son)
also belonged to the same school of thought. When all heretics
were banished from Germany and Switzerland, they took refuge
in the Netherlands and in England, where the spiritual piety of
the period of the Revolution was, to a large extent, nourished on
their writings. Bohme’s works were printed in Holland and then
translated into English ; thus his influence was exercised in these
countries just as Franck’s influence had spread to Holland and
to England.
Kepler
Among great natural scientists, Kepler had leanings in this
direction ; it is, indeed, otherwise a well-known fact that he had
488 See p. 973.
X
vol. n.
770 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
a close affinity with Neo-Platonism, which in principle is the
underlying philosophy of all mysticism. He compared his new
doctrine of Nature with the Bible in the limitation of revelation
to the religious “intentions” of the Spirit, and through the Spirit’s
“accommodation” through the “letter” of Scripture to the popular
way of thinking and speaking; he also had to wage a furious
conflict with the theologians, and he only saved his mother’s
life (she was accused of witchcraft) by a heated literary con-
troversial campaign.
Comenius
Another of the important reformers and prophets of the future
who belonged to this group was Amos Comenius, the last Bishop
of the Bohemian Church of the Brethren, who, after terrible
sufferings, like so many others, found a refuge in Amsterdam.
In natural matters, like the Pietists and Quakers at a later
date, he was the champion of an empirical-sensationalist-
utilitarian conception, which also formed the point of departure
for educational reform. On the other hand, from the religious
point of view, he held Chiliast views, and was a Platonist and a
mystic. He looked forward to the spiritual unity of mankind, and
hoped for the time when all religious denominations would
disappear. Like Sebastian Franck, he belonged to the number of
those who are secretly pledged to a better future; only to-day
can his hopes be completely understood.
David Joris
The Jorists and the Familists belonged originally to the entirely
different realm of frenzied and fanatical mysticism. The idea of
the approaching End of the World, which was closely connected
with the collapse of the previous Church — an idea often expressed
by Luther — and the examples of the “enthusiasm” of the Early
Church and of the Apocalypse, were closely akin to that kind of
fanaticism, especially to that of the Anabaptists, with their exclu-
sive emphasis upon Scripture. This expectation was intensified
by the terrible nervousness produced by the horribly cruel
persecution to which these people were exposed. Both these
groups represented the development of a more settled mystical
and “spiritual” movement which had emerged out of this un-
disciplined fanaticism; thus they became significant forces in
489 See p. 973.
PROTESTANTISM 77 1
the formation of the great mystical movement which issued later
on in the English Revolution and in Pietism.
The Jorists arose with David Joris, a Dutch contemporary
of Luther, who took part first of all in the Reform movement and
then in the Anabaptist movement. He sought to unite the two
wings of the Anabaptist movement — the radical violent wing and
the passive section — in the one supreme principle of mysticism. He
taught a mystical ethic consisting of serenity and brotherly love ;
but within his teaching there were some traces of Libertinism
and Antinomianism, deduced from the principle of the freedom
and perfection of the Spirit. The peculiarity of this movement,
however, lay in the fact that he made this mysticism the basis of
a community which, without worship or sacraments, was attached
to his own person, since in wonderful visions he described himself
as the herald of the Spirit of Christ, or as “the third David” at
the dawn of this new era in world-history, of the Third Dispensa-
tion, the era of the Spirit. At the same time he gathered round his
own person a group of individuals, based on the family principle,
for which in fantastic “revelations” and “messages” he demanded
recognition from the authorities in Church and State. He claimed
for himself that miraculous vocation which Schwenkfeld, Coorn-
heert, and the Collegian ts had just as emphatically disclaimed.
He united the sense of this vocation with his doctrine of the three
eras of world-history, and of a special indwelling and unveiling
of the hitherto imperfectly revealed Spirit of Christ, gathering
all this up in his own person. This is why Coornheert, who
otherwise agreed with his mystical principles, attacked him so
vehemently. Joris was willing to conform outwardly to any form
of religious worship ; meanwhile he lived in Basel as a respected
citizen, secretly controlling a large and widespread movement
with many branches, which likewise only grew in secret. Long
afterwards radical Pietists were accused of being “poisoned by
Joris”, for his writings were still being reprinted at the close of
the sixteenth century. The indignant citizens of Basel, who had
only seen in him a noble foreign gentleman of exemplary piety,
were only able to exercise the law against heretics on his corpse.
The modern sect of the Nazarenes is an interesting example of
a similar movement; their prophet, Wirtz, claimed a similar
position for himself and the movement was also propagated in
secret; in other way? it was in line with the primitive mystical
tradition, and circulated its literature . 490
4,0 See p. 973.
772 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Hendrik Niclaes and the Familists
At the same time there arose alongside of the Jorist movement
an important counterpart, the “House of Love” or the “Familia
caritatis”. This movement was founded by a merchant named
Hendrik Niclaes. Niclaes had left the Roman Catholic Church,
and, without joining any of the Reform parties, he had swung
over into a visionary “Enthusiasm”, combined with the familiar
ideas of German mysticism, of “deification” and of “tranquil-
lity”, of the “Divine Spark” of Light and Love; he also taught
an ethic of religious perfection with its victory over “the flesh”
and “the letter”. He found his sphere of influence, however,
first of all in Protestant circles, since he represented himself as
the Prophet of the Last Days on the strength of his visionary
vocation and of his “deification”; proclaiming the well-known
three eras of the religious history of the world, he took upon
himself the role of the prophet of the last era. In this last era the
inwardness of the Spirit is dominant, as it was formerly in the
Primitive State ; pure ascetic holiness and love prevail, and that
complete freedom from law, history and the “letter”, which is the
ultimate sign of a full-grown fanaticism. It is, however, significant
that this “prophet” did not merely bind the members of his
community together in a personal way round himself, but that
he created a hierarchical and communist organization. In creating
this Society Niclaes had a twofold aim: (i) after the example of
the Anabaptists, he sought to create the pure community of the
New Jerusalem ; while (2) after the example of Catholicism, this
Society ought to represent a holy priesthood; the second aim,
however, could only be realized through an inner “election”.
Coornheert also opposed this group, since it renewed the idea of
the hierarchy, and because its fanaticism spoiled the disciplined
simplicity of the Spirit’s ministry made known to us in the
Scriptures. But these ideas spread far and wide, especially in
England, where Bunyan transformed the allegorical mystical
journey of the Prophet into his Pilgrim's Progress and where
almost all fanatical phenomena could be traced back to the
Familists. The so-called “Ranters”, in particular, a very eccentric
“spiritual” group, were supposed to derive their ideas from them.
At the English Revolution the movement disappeared. The
Catholic-Apostolic Church of Edward Irving is a modem move-
ment which bears a certain resemblance to the Familists. Along-
side of these two groups there were still several smaller “prophetic”
communities of a similar kind, but of less historical signi-
PROTESTANTISM
773
ficance, consisting in part of the dissatisfied members of both
groups . 491
Labadie
While these movements, which have just been described, arose
at the time when the ecclesiastical situation in Holland was still
unsettled, the Labadists represent a domestic community founded
on monastic and communistic lines, in opposition to the Calvin-
istic State Church system of the Netherlands. Jean de la Badie
was originally a Catholic priest, and had been in close touch with
the Jesuits. He fell under the spell of Quietism, and of the doctrine
of the “Inner Word” ; he adopted Augustinian views on grace,
free-will, and predestination. Finding that he had more in common
with the Reformed Church he went over to Calvinism; he was
soon driven out of France, however, and then found an enthusiastic
welcome among the Dutch Pietists. He became pastor of a French-
speaking congregation at Middelburg; here, however, he began
to reorganize his congregation on the basis of the “Inner Word”,
the “ladder of contemplation”, and of strict asceticism, striving
to form a new community of the “Heavenly Jerusalem”. In
consequence his old friends deserted him. Uniting the mystical
principle with that of monasticism and of the Chiliastic Anabap-
tists, he then created his communistic house-community, which
was doomed to an unrestful wandering life until it finally dis-
appeared; but during its short existence it had succeeded in
scattering seeds of mystical thought in all directions. This move-
ment thus belongs to the history both of the sect-type and of
mysticism — a double aspect which we have been forced to admit
several times ; this, however, does not do away with the fact that
both types are distinct . 492
Mysticism in the Netherlands
in the Seventeenth Century
In addition to these movements, about the middle of the
seventeenth century a fresh tide of mystical life swept through the
Netherlands, similar to the movement which was spreading at
the same time through England. This awakening was in line with
the Dutch religious tradition ; early mystical influences from the
fifteenth century continued to affect the religious life of the
country, for in the pre-Reformation period Holland had served
both as a centre and a place of refuge for every imaginable kind
of mystical movement. As we have already seen, the Pietistic
491 See p. 974. 4M See p. 974.
774 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Puritanism which came into the Netherlands from England led
to a form of mysticism which regarded the ecclesiastical doctrine
of salvation, public worship, and the story of Redemption as
matters of absolute indifference. The younger Teellinck, Loden-
steyn, and Brakel in the seventeenth century, and Schortinghuys
in the eighteenth century, pressed this theory to its extremist limit,
and very nearly succeeded in entirely destroying the connection
between the “inner life” and the salvation offered by the
Church . 493 Others, like the followers of Jakob Verschoor or
Pontiaan van Hattem, tended towards Pantheism. The whole
atmosphere provided the background for the ethic both of
Spinoza and of Geulinex . 494 The Collegiants awakened out of
their quiet life, and, in the person of Galenus, they carried their
spirit of Independency, and of “prophesying”, and their doctrine
of the Inner Light, into the Baptist movement, with reforming
power; this activity aroused deep and passionate controversy
down to the eighteenth century. New prophets of “enthusiasm”
and of holiness arose, urged forward by the passionate tension
caused by the great new Dutch struggle for existence against
Louis XIV.
Lutheran mystics and the followers of Bohme, as well as the
heralds of French Quietism, spread their message far and wide.
Quaker missionaries also awakened in the Netherlands the idea
that the real Reformation of Christendom was only now beginning,
since the Reform of Luther and Calvin had merely resulted in a
fresh form of Catholicism, which had left Christendom inwardly
unchanged. Thus, in the second half of the seventeenth century,
mysticism in the Netherlands developed into a widespread move-
ment, touching large masses of the population. It affected all
classes of Society, even though the various groups differed greatly
from one another. The Pietism which was simply the complement
of the Church, remained quite distinct from the non-ecclesiastical
“religion of the Spirit”, although in the end the Pietist mystics
were only separated from it by their desire to remain loyal to the
Church.
In practice this “spiritual religion” usually gained a footing in
the following manner : first of all it penetrated into the Baptist
movement, which for some time past had already made its peace
with the State ; once that had been achieved, and in spite of very
strong opposition from the Baptist sect itself, it proceeded to use
the Baptist movement as a kind of springboard from which it
plunged into a purely non-ecclesiastical mysticism; then it
493 Cf. Heppe, pp. 169-204, 375 - 489 • 494 See p. 975.
PROTESTANTISM
775
revived the old passion for social reform which marked the earlier
stages of the Baptist movement. This process of development,
therefore, accounts for the fact that from the very outset this
movement also revealed a practical, fanatically reforming ten-
dency, a characteristic which it did not possess in the time of
Sebastian Franck and Coornheert. However greatly these groups
differed from each other, in this respect they were all one : they
all repudiated the sacramentalism of the Church and the literalism
of the sect, popular Christianity and external authority, and all
the previous history of the Church from Constantine down to
Luther and Calvin. Everywhere this movement exhibited the
traits of an extreme form of the “religion of the Spirit”, with its
radical individualism, its criticism of all literalism, authority, and
doctrine, with its impulse towards “direct” subjective experience,
and its exclusive dependence on the “inward Christ”, apart from
external Christianity with its historical miracles.
Its forms of fellowship were certainly most varied and curious.
Some of its adherents, as we have already said, for a time utilized
the Baptist movement, upon which they exercised an inwardly
disintegrating effect. Others maintained purely individualistic
groups of the “prophetic” order, or exclusive fellowship groups
meeting in private houses like the Labadists. Others again
sought to found new associations, or even denied all need for social
organization at all, looking for the entirely free activity of the
Spirit in a new era with a purely spiritual Church.
Their ethic also was equally varied, though everywhere it
reflected the main characteristic mystical asceticism, with its
desire to conquer the “flesh” and the “world”. In individual
cases, however, we find a purely passive Quietism, the purely
spiritual, super-sensible freedom of those who have been “born
of the Spirit”, combined with an entire independence of all the
conventions of bourgeois morality, even in sex questions. This
movement also revealed that asceticism of labour and the
“calling” which is characteristic of Puritan Pietism; all this was
combined with a more or less detached attitude towards State
institutions, and the customs of Society, with fantastic expectations
of world peace, and the renunciation of all use of the law, of
authority and force, in every sense of the word ; above all, it was
combined with that indifference to all morality in general which
belongs to this type of extreme spirituality, and finally with an
inner impulse to the most self-sacrificing labours of charity. In
this ethical system, of course, the following ideals are taken for
granted : toleration and freedom of conscience ; exclusion of the
776 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
State from all religious matters ; the ideal of a State built up as
far as possible upon love, peace, and the common good, combined
with an active opposition to the existing order of the State, with
its tyranny, its use of force, and its “carnal” selfishness. In spite of
this attitude towards the State, however, the leaders of this move-
ment stated explicitly that all reform must come from within,
through the power of the Spirit, quite naturally, without revolu-
tion and without external violence. Therefore, greatly to the
annoyance of the presbyteries and the ministers, the civil govern-
ment in general left these people alone, so long as they did not
become a practical danger to its institutions and to generally
accepted customs. Like all exaggerated idealism, this movement
gradually faded away and died out. Its emphasis upon the “Holy
Spirit of Christ”, which, indeed, it interpreted in the sense of
conscience, reason, and Natural Law, finally (as usually happens)
changed into rationalistic and philosophical reason . 495
Mysticism in England in the
Seventeenth Century
The spirit of mysticism had a still more important development
in the conditions created by the English Revolution.
The English, whose practical sobriety and common sense we
are accustomed to consider a racial trait, had their great mystical
period. It is true that the mysticism which waits and suffers in
silence, looking for deliverance only to the power of the Indwelling
Christ, plays a smaller part than the more aggressive and practical
forms of Christian morality, expressed first of all in the political
religion of the Presbyterians, and then in the ideals of the radical
Baptists. But alongside of and beneath all this more aggressive
movement there flowed a strong current of “spiritual religion”
which bore to the masses of the people the ideas of complete
separation between Church and State; of a radical lay-Christ-
ianity ; of freedom to preach and prophesy ; of an ethical renewal,
springing out of all this, and characterized by readiness for self-
sacrifice and brotherly love; of a pure doctrine free from all
academic scholasticism, freely springing up from within. It was the
impact of these ideas which first inclined the masses of the people
to turn partly to Independency and partly to the Baptist move-
ment. Both these tendencies were full of elements which provided
a favourable soil for mystical ideas. On the other hand, however,
mysticism also led easily to the conclusion that a Free Church
movement was needed, in which the sacraments should be dis-
m See p. 975.
PROTESTANTISM
777
pcnsed only to those who were worthy of them, just as those
movements were accustomed to proclaim. From this point of
view also it was not difficult to persuade Puritan Pietism to give
up its ecclesiastical way of thinking. Where mysticism steered
clear of all these fusions, or freed itself from them, there it created
groups which concentrated on “inward religion” like the
“Seekers” or “Waiters”, and the Quakers, or orgiastic-libertine
groups like the Ranters. Thus it came to pass that at this time
mysticism became a power in the general life of the English
people in a way that it had never before attained, and which
it never reached again.
The sources of this movement lay deep in the history before the
period of the Commonwealth. Pietism had already opened its
gates to mysticism through Hall, Francis Rous, and James Jane-
away. Even under the Stuarts there had already been radical
mystics, of whom John Everard, whom a Dutch writer regards as
the precursor of Quakerism, is an outstanding example. Everard
was a preacher and writer who lived at the beginning of
the seventeenth century ; he translated Poimandres, Dionysius the
Areopagite, the writings of Tauler, the Theologia Germanica , the
Widerruf of Hans Denk, and other mystical works into English,
while he himself, in his Treasury of Revelation , expounded the
most advanced ideas of the “Inward Word” and of redemption
through interior union with God. In support of his views he quoted
from Plato, Plotinus, Proclus, Origen, Augustine, Bernard, and
St. Francis of Assisi. During a life of continual conflict with the
authorities in Church and State, in which he suffered greatly,
Everard gained a large band of adherents, with whom the
Fanulists and other branches of mysticism seem to have been
fused.
Further, there were the groups composed of the disciples of
Jakob Bohme, whose works reached England by way of the
Netherlands, and were translated into English at this time.
This movement had a strong influence on George Fox at the
beginning of his ministry, until he turned away from it because
the followers of Bohme retained the sacraments.
Neither must we forget the great school of the Cambridge
Platonists, the real philosophical Enlightenment of the England
of that day, which illuminated the darkness of ecclesiastical
Aristotelianism, and proclaimed a mystical ethic of a Neo-
Platonic kind. The rationalistic technical philosophy of progress
of the court-official Bacon, which belongs to the same period,
had no practical significance.
778 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
The movement did not culminate, however, in this scientific
intellectual mysticism which was based upon stable, eternal
spiritual principles. There arose alongside of it, nourished by
Baptist literature and Dutch influences, and intensified by the
terrible confusion of the period, the “Enthusiastic* * mysticism of
visionaries, ecstatics, and “prophets’*. This form of spirituality
had a strong tinge of Chiliasm, while doctrinally it was entirely
at the mercy of all kinds of sudden and changing ideas and
whims ; still, it contributed something to the spiritual life of the
day by awakening the desire for first-hand religious experience,
and by the endeavour to prove the reality of its religious experi-
ence in ethical and ascetic practice. Then, in a thousand different
ways, this “visionary** movement merged into genuine mysticism.
This wave of mystical experience was not confined to small
groups, but it permeated the religious life of the time. Even
statesmen and generals acted according to “lights** and “revela-
tions”, and listened respectfully to the “prophets’* who arose at
this time, believing that they might possibly have a real “word”
from God. Cromwell, for instance, believed that further inter-
course with George Fox would lead him into agreement with his
views; Fox, however, rightly maintained that Cromwell was
mistaken.
Another element of the seething religious life of that period was
the rise of the anarchic movement of Independency. Originally
it was a purely Calvinist tendency which merely claimed the
independence of congregations consisting of genuine Christians,
but it subsequently developed the desire for liberty into licence.
The Independents demanded and exercised entire freedom to
preach, both for men and women ; they claimed to have received
“direct illumination” from God and the “witness of the Spirit”,
and they developed the inferences drawn from the principle of a
regenerate community into a theory of advanced individualism.
Alongside of the General Baptists, whose outlook had been
strongly influenced by the Mennonites, the rest of the Baptists
displayed their old tendency towards “Enthusiasm” and
mysticism.
Out of all these groups and influences there arose the “spirit-
mongers”, as they were called by the bitter polemic of the
Puritans. Thus we are able to understand how it was that both
the great preachers at Cromwell’s Headquarters, John Dell and
John Saltmarsh, were enlightened mystics.
John Dell taught that the true Church ought to be founded
solely upon the Word and its inherent miraculous power, because
PROTESTANTISM
779
the Word is the spontaneous source of the congregational life
which clusters round it : the one essential is to permit it to follow
its free course, unhindered, as Luther had taught in his earlier
days. When men raised this question : How then are believers to
know which is the true teaching, and how are they to recognize
the genuine Heralds of the Word? he replied that true believers
were endowed with the faculty of recognizing one another.
In Dell’s teaching certainly “the Word” is always the “Inward
Word”, which is immanent both in the Scriptures and in the
heart of the believer, which, like the Logos, is timeless and broods
over both.
John Saltmarsh preached the old mystical doctrine of the
three dispensations: from Adam to Christ, from Christ to the
age of the Spirit, and from this third era, which has now begun,
to the Celestial Jerusalem. In this Third Dispensation there is
no longer any need for the “letter” of Scripture nor for the law,
neither for an ordained minority nor for an external Church at
all; everything is summed up in the Indwelling Christ, who
reveals Himself in love.
We have already met these ideas in Sebastian Franck, Coorn-
heert, and the Collegiants; there is also much in them which
reminds us of Schwenkfeld. As in the mysticism of the Netherlands,
there were many different exponents of this “spiritual” move-
ment, and yet all had something in common. Some of them
formed new communities of their own for worship; under the
regime of freedom others accepted appointments within the
Church, while others again strenuously opposed all official
ecclesiasticism, and every organized form of worship. Some
accepted the system of tithes and the official ecclesiasticism which
was built upon it; others rejected both.
This movement affected all classes of Society. Everywhere it
was characterized by that asceticism which extreme fanatics
easily transformed into the “liberty of the flesh”. All these groups
found the question of war, and of an authority which is based
upon external compulsion, the most difficult problem of all.
Some held that a “holy war” was justified in “the Last Days”;
others repudiated this idea. Some wished to recognize the State
and the law under Christian auspices only; others were willing
to accept existing institutions for the sake of order.
The whole movement represents an enormous variety of ideas
and opinions. Yet underlying it there was an immense Utopian
idealism, which confidently hoped that the “Age of the Spirit”
would make it possible to establish a social order free from all
780 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
compromise with the world, which would be “Christian” in the
true sense of the word . 496
These “spiritual” hopes met the same fate as the dream of
world-renewal cherished by the radical Baptists: they were
shattered by the hard facts of political and social life. These
struggles resulted in the Protectorate on the one hand, followed
by the Restoration and finally by Whig Liberalism, and on the
other by the revulsion from all Christian super-idealism, the
secularization of the “Spirit” into Reason, with which Deism
initiated the great period of the criticism of the history and
philosophy of religion of the new era. All that remained of the
mystical upheaval was “the Children of the Light” or the “Society
of Friends”, as the Quakers called themselves. In the final form of
their doctrine they are the direct descendants of the spirituality
of the Reformation period, heralds of the Inner Light, of an
individual rebirth through the Eternal Christ, in whose message
the Spirit in the regenerate soul and in the Bible is one ; heralds
of the presence of the Divine Light, that Light which lightens
every man coming into the world, and which is only released
from the prison house of the flesh when it comes into contact with
the Bible. It would, however, create a false impression, if we were
to interpret them from this point of view alone. In reality the
Society of Friends represents the union of this mystical doctrine
with the Baptist ideal of the pure and holy voluntary community,
based on genuine conversion and freedom from State control.
The Society of Friends
The Quakers overcame the natural anti-social, or rather
individualistic, tendency of mysticism by adopting the Mennonite
constitution, and, above all, that of the Collegiants. Like them
they have an inner and an outer circle, elders and overseers for
poor relief, meetings and love-feasts, free lay-preaching — (to the
lay-preaching they add the Meeting for silent worship, where the
members wait on God together for light) — community discipline
and excommunication. The sign of admission into membership,
however, is not Adult Baptism ; the candidate for admission simply
has to satisfy the Society that he is “converted” or “born again” ;
the candidate’s outward behaviour is also taken into account,
and this matter is left in the hands of the overseers. The free
community of the Spirit must act on the assumption that the
Spirit bears witness to Himself in the election of elders and in the
acceptance of candidates.
496 See p. 976.
PROTESTANTISM
781
So far this Quaker constitution is very similar to Luther’s
original “spiritual” ideal of a congregation. The problems which
arise out of this ideal, in connection with the reception of new
members and the election of elders and overseers, are solved by
committing all to the guidance of the Spirit. But they had to
discover through experience that this Society, formed by the
Spirit in freedom, became, through the sheer force of the habit
of community-life, an inherited membership handed down from
one generation to another, a “birthright” membership, instead
of the free adherence of all who are truly converted to the Society
of Friends.
It was not only their constitution, however, which linked the
Quakers with the Baptist movement. In ethics also, like the
Baptists, they avoided Antinomianism, took the Sermon on the
Mount as their ethical ideal, and required their members to
renounce all worldly honours and official position ; further, they
were to take no part in war, nor in the administration of the law ;
in all exercise of authority over others, on the positive side, the
members of the Society were urged to practise a most generous
love of the brethren, and charity towards the poor.
At this stage of its development — as has been often pointed out —
the Society of Friends represents the final expression in its purest
form of the Anabaptist Movement. Later, however, like the
Mennonites, to whom they were closely akin, they became
distinctly bourgeois. They found it impossible to continue to live
in their original detachment from the world ; more and more they
combined the Calvinistic ethic of the “calling” with their ascetic
way of life. Then God “blessed their business” with those eco-
nomfc results which this ascetic Protestant idea of the “calling”
usually brings with it. Thus a religious body which sprang into
existence out of an entirely unworldly spiritual movement,
developed into a community with an entirely different ideal ; in
its ultimate form it exhibited the following characteristic traits:
a high sense of the duty of labour ; the limitation of the kind of
work which may be undertaken to useful and practical under-
takings in trade, industry, manual labour, and agriculture ; strict
personal economy and a minimum amount of luxury, with a
maximum amount of effort for the welfare of the community;
supervision by the Society of the business honesty and solvency
of its members, of family life, of the education of the children ;
in short, it is the same ideal as that of Geneva in the days of early
Calvinism, the only difference being that this community is
founded upon a voluntary basis. The Quakers, therefore, became
782 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
bourgeois precisely because they had accepted the Puritan
ascetic idea of “the calling” ; this only harmonizes with Bern-
stein’s theory that asceticism is a “bourgeois” virtue, that is, that
it produces the bourgeois attitude towards life.
It is, however, particularly significant that, in the person of
Penn, the greatest of the Quakers, who expressed their ideals in
their purest form, the Society of Friends had the opportunity of
forming a State and a society upon the virgin soil of America,
with the aid of this most severe, and in many respects most
logical, conception of a true Christian ethic. The Quaker State of
Pennsylvania was the “Holy Experiment”, the creation of a real
Christian State upon the joint basis of the freedom of the Spirit
and a strict ethic. It was a State without compulsory religious
organizations, and with complete separation between Church
and State. In actual practice, of course, it was affected by the
fact that the Quakers were in the majority, and their Christian
spirit influenced the State ; this situation was maintained by the
general confidence felt in the Quakers, whose representatives
were continually re-elected to public office. In this colony, where
civilization was only in its initial stages, the circumstances were
favourable : the only possible conflicts that could arise were those
between the colonists and the Indians, or with neighbouring
colonies. Simple, quiet, God-fearing farmers, who lived in a small
circle where everyone knew the affairs of everyone else, freed
from all the hindrances of a crowded population, were able to
simplify their lives and order their affairs in peace. They were
able to establish relations with the Indians by peaceful methods,
and within the State, at least in the beginning, most personal
difficulties were settled by friendly arbitration, apart from lhw or
compulsion. When this method did not succeed, no objection
was raised against formal proceedings in a court of law, nor even
against capital punishment. The exercise of force towards im-
penitent disturbers of the peace was regarded as being in a
different category from that of war; it was, indeed, considered to
be the duty of a Christian Government to deal with such matters.
Finally, after an existence of seventy years, this Christian State
went to pieces over the problems of war and of religious toleration.
This is how it happened : the colony was forced by the Mother
Country to take part in the war between England and France.
The Quakers then refused to take part in the administration of the
colony, in order to avoid giving their consent to the imposition
of war taxes. The result of this was that the other religious de-
nominations in the State, which had always been tolerated by the
PROTESTANTISM
783
Quakers but not converted to their views, gained the upper hand.
With their loss of influence in the administration of the Colony,
the Quakers also lost their spiritual influence. When the great
War of Independence broke out, the Quakers had to submit to
the tragic fate of being mere passive spectators of a struggle which
was being waged, to a very large extent, for their own ideals.
From that moment they came to the conclusion that public life
was not for the Christian at all, and they gave up the “Holy
Experiment* * for ever. Another section of the Society, however,
among whom was Franklin, gave up the early Christian idea of
non-resistance, and threw itself all the more ardently into the
democratic movement, as a directly Christian duty. But the main
body, which was increasingly forced into a minority existence,
withdrew into the life of the religious Society itself, closed its ranks,
and developed a magnificent philanthropic activity. In spite of
that, however, the process of secularization was not arrested.
The glory of this later period was the successful campaign for the
liberation of the slaves and for the humane education of the
negroes; while the Quakers were dominant they had already
shown the way by personal example, and so far as they were
concerned they had freed all their slaves.
European Quakerism developed along similar lines, and it
arrived at the same result, the only difference being that it reached
its term far more swiftly than in America, since the detour of the
“Holy Experiment” was absent. European Quakers excel in the
economic virtues, in honesty, and in Christian philanthropy;
lacking the propagandist spirit, however, they do not increase in
numbers ; this also is very significant for the understanding of the
religicflis life from the sociological point of view: the spirit of
toleration and “inwardness” which is produced by opposition to
compulsory Christianity is not favourable for the maintenance of
an organic body.
Within their own society the Quakers were content to solve the
problems of Christian social life upon the basis of private pro-
perty, honest hard work, and the care of the poor. Beyond their
own circle they worked through philanthropic and humanitarian
movements. It is particularly interesting that one of their number,
John Bellers (d. 1725), recognized the inadequacy of these
bourgeois ideas, and proposed, first of all to the Friends, and then
to Parliament, a Socialistic scheme of productive co-operative
societies founded on Christian, as well as economic, social, and
political ideas. At the same time, however, he took into account
the whole general situation — with its bourgeoisie and its capitalism
784 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
— as well as the habits of the Friends. For all that, he went right
to the root of the problem of poverty and riches, since, in addition
to a better organization of labour, he also proposed a more just
and equal division of the fruit of toil for the sake of the Gospel.
Thus in the nineteenth century Richard Owen appealed to
Belters* ideas, and found some of his best helpers among the
Quakers . 497
With Quakerism the wave of mysticism in England was spent.
Even the Society of Friends itself increasingly lost its spiritual
vitality. From that time forward either the modern bourgeois
spirit of “enlightenment”, which took place in connection with
the rise of the middle classes, or an ecclesiasticism, which, in its
better section, was inclined towards Pietism, has been the
prevailing feature in the situation; both these elements are
characterized by that utilitarian spirit which Calvinism so often
evinces towards secular questions, and which only too often also
affects the spiritual life.
Methodism and Pietism
The second great period of religious awakening, therefore, the
Methodist Revival, was not based upon mysticism at all. Certainly
it felt a very urgent and deep desire for a direct personal experi-
ence; but it satisfied that desire by indulging in “Enthusiasm”
and emotional revivalism. We have already seen how sidely this
differs from “spirituality” and mysticism, and how very differ-
ently it works out in the organization of a religious community.
The overwhelming effect of the Methodist Revival upon the
masses, an effect which was constantly renewed and apostolic in
its power and fervour, was based explicitly upon this embtional
revivalism; it was along this path that Methodism was able to
reach individuals and classes of Society whom it would have been
impossible to reach in any other way. This form of “Enthusiasm”
certainly contained within itself the danger of an anarchical
individualism ; but, as we have seen, Methodism met this danger
by a still more careful and effective system of organization,
through which the individual was definitely linked up with the
whole. Methodism is as masterly in the art of organization as it
is in the art of revivalism.
On its ethical side, the emphasis upon liberty and joy repre-
sented the “enthusiastic” aspect of the movement, and might
very easily have led to Antinomianism. Here, however, the full
logical result of the mystical idea was forestalled by the introduc-
See p. 978.
PROTESTANTISM
785
tion of Calvinist austerity, which was the method which pre-
served and made known the state of grace ; this point, too, has
already been mentioned. The only really important result of the
exclusive emphasis upon “spirituality” was an extreme simplifica-
tion of the practical and dogmatic content of Christian thought.
After the initial success of the Methodist Revival, however, it
passed through the experience which, at an earlier period, had
often befallen the Religious Orders, when a period of ardour and
growth would be followed by one of complacency and stagnation,
and a fresh reform movement would be required. Thus, in order
to avoid the danger of lapsing into secularism and indifference,
or even into a formal Church life, Methodism in all its branches
has constantly felt the need for fresh revivals, sweeping the whole
movement with the wind of the Spirit . 488
Continental Pietism has been considerably influenced by
mystical ideas. Pietism has often been described as a phenomenon
composed of many heterogeneous elements; this is due to the
fact [which applies equally to Quakerism and to various groups
within the Baptist movementj of the prevalence of these very
ideas. German Calvinist Pietism, which was largely influenced
by the Netherlands and the mystical elements in English Pietism,
has already been mentioned. To that we can only add, at this
point, a brief allusion to the deeply spiritual poet, Tersteegen.
Like Sebastian Franck and Coornheert, Tersteegen was entirely
aloof from the organized Church life of his own day ; he acted,
however, as the chosen leader of a group of mystical souls which
resembled the fellowship of an earlier period known as the
“Friends of God”. Lavater and Jung Stilling must also be noted ;
as mystics of the Reformed Church it is true, of course, that both
of them, under the influence of modern ideas of Immanence and
of Humanitarianism, did not lay a great deal of stress upon the
opposition that exists between the world and holiness, between
the flesh and the spirit. Their faith centred in a Christ-mysticism,
which was authenticated by experiences of “answered prayer 5 5 ;
it developed a piety which was full of light and independent of
all confessions, and it evolved a purely individualistic form of
group-fellowship. On the whole, however, the mysticism of the
498 For this Enthusiasm, see Lecky , II, 582-589, and also James: Varieties of
Religious Experience , London , 1902. The illustrative material for this study in the
psychology of religion is drawn almost entirely from this sphere. — For the
mystical element in Methodism, which was mediated through Moravian
influences, see Schneckenburger: Kleinere Kirchenparteien , pp. 150 ff. ; what Loofs
says against this point of view in PRE . , XII , 774 and 779, does not seem to me
to alter it.
vol. n. Y
786 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Calvinistic churches, after its first attempt to reform the whole
Church on sectarian and ascetic lines, to a great extent retired
into a mysticism which was indifferent to organized Church life
altogether, and cultivated a strict holiness of life which bore many
traces of the influence of Quietism.
Lutheran Pietism was already far more predisposed to experi-
ence a similar development, owing to the fact of Luther’s high
estimate of mediaeval mysticism, and to the orthodox doctrine of
the Unio Mystica. At an early date the Christ-mysticism of St.
Bernard penetrated into and revitalized its dogmatic Christology.
The early Lutheran ascetic writers and hymnologists, who laid
great stress on the need for “inwardness” and fervour within the
Protestant churches, were particularly open to influences of this
kind. In this connection Arndt ought to be mentioned particu-
larly. Arndt did not belong to the rigorous “conventicle” type of
piety, and his tendency was wholly in the direction of mysticism
and spirituality; at the same time he was always careful to
maintain his connection with Lutheran theology, and he laid
great emphasis upon the power of “the Word”. As a friend of
Valentine Weigel, and an admirer of Paracelsus, with a thorough
knowledge of devotional mystical literature, he instinctively made
a compromise between the Lutheranism of the ministry and the
Word, and the religion of direct inner illumination, between the
dogma of justification and the doctrine of deification, between
the radical doctrine of Original Sin and panentheistic ideas of
Immanence — a compromise which is full of inconsistencies and
contradictions, but which still possesses a strong spiritual vitality
and influence. Arndt’s ideas met with a good deal of opposition,
but the current of thought which he had set in motion continued
to develop, and Pietism in particular was greatly influenced by
it. This tendency was intensified by influences from England,
the Netherlands, and from Jakob Bohme, in addition to those
which emanated from the older literature of mysticism. On the
whole, however, this school of thought did not advance beyond
this position: it held the doctrine of the “degrees of orison”, or
the “ladder of contemplation” which led to union with God; it
adapted the Christ-mysticism of St. Bernard (rather sentimentally)
in accordance with the tastes of the day, and it fostered a mystical
hope of the Kingdom of God, which, however, did not expect the
ministry, the Word, and the Sacrament to be entirely discarded
until the spiritual Advent of Christ. Ecstasies and visions, miracles
and prophets also formed part of the phenomena of the move-
ment. Spener himself, whose scrupulous mind had little in
PROTESTANTISM
787
common with mysticism, certainly loved the mediaeval mystical
literature, and would often describe the Church as the “hidden
Seed of the beloved souls in every Church” : a favourite phrase in
English mysticism. With Spener and his disciples the emphasis
upon inward experience and its practical results in daily life was
certainly almost as important as the doctrine of justification by
faith which constituted the Church’s treasure-house of grace;
from that standpoint it was easy to pass on into mysticism,
especially when ascetic holiness was no longer conceived in the
Calvinistic sense, but was based upon “spiritual” and Quietistic
ideas. Spener’s chief opponent, Dilfeld, was, however, only able
to accuse him of “a subtile enthusiasm”.
Franke
Franke, who had adapted Pietism to the purposes of theological
education, and thus to that extent directly assumed the existence
of the Church, still furthered the “enthusiastic” side in many
respects by insisting on the doctrine of conviction of sin, and of
an explicit experience of conversion, with a definite date — a point
of view which it is difficult to combine with a belief in Infant
Baptism. This emphasis on the need for a direct “consciousness”
of the “state of grace” had a certain mystical tendency. Thus
Franke used to quote Tauler with great approval as an illustration
of a praxis interioris Christianismi , and he also translated a treatise
by St. Catherine of Genoa. This is why Loscher was able to accuse
Pietists of that type of great offences against Church life: “An
indifferentism which had the appearance of religion, lack of
appreciation of the means of grace, and particularly of the
preacfiing of the Word ; a tendency towards mysticism, Enthusi-
asm, and Chiliasm ; a habit of talking about the “image of God”,
in Nature, and in Man ; a confusing of Nature with Grace ; talk
about “begodded” (deified) men; faith interpreted as experience
and spiritual feeling ; the harbouring and defending of fanatics.”
At this point the way for a transition to real mysticism had been
opened up, but, on the whole, this did not often happen, for
German Pietism is essentially definitely ecclesiastical, and “En-
thusiasm” and Christ-mysticism of the St. Bernard type, which
belongs to the non-intellectual realm of fantasy, did not appeal
to it.
Arnold and Dippel
Apart from all kinds of narrow-minded groups and dishonest
hypocrites, the only names we need to consider are those of
788 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Gottfried Arnold and Dippel, both of whom, it is true, were men
of outstanding importance. They were thoroughly individualistic
mystics, who refused to join any organized Christian body at all.
Their particular theories may be summarized thus : they believed
that Christian fellowship only existed in its purity in the Primitive
Church, before the time of Constantine ; that the significance of
Christ and of Redemption consists in quickening the Divine “seed”
which is latent within the soul of every human being; they
emphasized the fact that religious men within the non-Christian
faiths possess a similar faculty in the “Divine Ground of the
soul” ; from the spiritual nature and spiritual unity of mankind
they deduced the doctrine of ascetic holiness, and an attitude of
indifference towards the existing social order which is based upon
Nature; they taught that the “Inward Word” is the same as the
natural moral law of love of humanity, and they looked for the
coming of the Kingdom of God, in which there would be no
ministry nor compulsory religion, nor a State Church.
In the last resort these are the characteristic features of a
Spirituality which is based upon a substructure of Neo-Platonism,
combined with the Spirit of Christ, and through Him with the
history of Christianity. From that position the interesting and
sarcastic Edelmann passed over to a Monism which openly
declared that historical Christianity was a sham and a delusion —
a point of view which must have given infinite pleasure to Arthur
Drews and his friends.
Thomasius
Christian Thomasius also belonged to the friends of the mystical
“Indifferentists” more than to those of real Pietism with # whom
he was at first connected. Upon that “Indifferentism” he built
up his system of church-order, and sought to unite Christians in
self-denial and in love, apart from the organization of any religious
society, which, under present conditions certainly, always has to
reckon everywhere with the positive order of the State Church.
His anti-ascetic temper, however, separated him from the mystics,
and thus he arrived at a Christian position which otherwise
resembled that of the “Enlightenment ”. 499
The Moravian Church
The mystical element within genuine Pietism reached its zenith
in the Moravian Church. The Count himself was its most out-
standing representative — indeed, it was Zinzendorf who expressed
4,1 See p. 979.
PROTESTANTISM
789
this type of piety in a form which was intimate and spiritual, but
also in extremely bad taste ; the language and the hymns used by
the earlier members of the Church of the Brethren usually drive
the modern reader to distraction. Zinzendorf no longer regarded
Pietism as an attempt to reform the Church; to him it was a
voluntary association of individuals who are united with the
Saviour who is spiritually present and who can be found in
the Word, just as he regarded the Early Church as due solely to the
personal influence of Jesus and as a personal union of believers.
He transformed Spener’s conventicle ideal into a form of free
Christian social life, through which he and the brethren, in this
community, guided by Providence, have been granted a special
relationship with the Person of the Saviour.
It is evident that here we are not dealing with a spirituality
which regards Christianity as an all-pervading spirit, which is
merely present in Christ in a special way, but with a Christian
mysticism which retains the doctrines of the Church, while, like
St. Paul and later St. Bernard, it entwines the objective fact of
Redemption with the sense of direct inward experience and
feeling. In this respect Zinzendorf was in thorough agreement with
the Jansenists. The only difference was, as Ritschl, with his usual
acuteness, rightly divined, that this Pietist Christ-mysticism,
and especially that of the Zinzendorf variety, always regarded
this direct experience as an entirely personal and private relation
with the living Saviour, whereas the older Christ-mysticism
satisfied the desire for a personal relationship in a much more
general manner. Pietism thus looks back over the whole history
of the development of Christian individualism, and already it has
a tinge of modern sentimental aesthetic individualism. In other
directions, however, the relation between Moravian mysticism
and ecclesiasticism is most obscure. Zinzendorf always considered
himself in agreement with Lutheran theology. In reality, how-
ever, he only agreed with certain sections of Lutheran doctrine.
With the ecclesiastical and sociological side of Lutheranism he
certainly did not agree. As we have already seen, with the help
of the Moravians, he was obliged to form a sectarian organization.
This sectarian idea, however, was again and again contradicted by
the Count’s peculiarly personal motive which was contained in
his strongly “spiritualized” Christ-mysticism. Behind the strong
emphasis upon a direct experience of the Living Christ, and the
extremely personal nature of the soul’s relation with the Saviour,
there lay concealed a certain indifference towards the historical
aspect of Christianity, and a certain warm affection for individual
790 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
religious peculiarities in their relative values. The disintegrating
results of this type of mysticism began to appear in the so-called
“sifting period” in Herrenhag, when Jesus was styled the “chief
elder” in the Moravian Church; they appeared also in the stress
which was laid on the “general spirit” of the Bible instead of on
literal interpretation; and in the emphasis upon a “general”
interest which extended far beyond the existing denominations,
in the depreciation of the importance of religious denominations,
which was expressed in the idea that they existed merely as
different methods of educating souls for the true love of Christ.
Above all, however, the exclusive emphasis upon personal piety —
which the Moravians displayed in their practice of mutual
confession, in their habit of including reports on the inner life of
individuals, in their practice of reading aloud these confessions
for purposes of personal edification — had a great influence, far
beyond the borders of the Moravian Church itself. In this sense
Schleiermacher and Novalis always remained true to the ideals
of Herrnhut ; they merely developed explicitly the ideas which
were implicit within them. In Fries also the clothing of the
universal religious idea with an individualizing and relativizing
symbolism was probably mainly due to the influence of the
Moravian Church . 600
Pietism at the present Day
This whole world of ideas has endured down to the present
day. It appears under various forms in the whole Pietist move-
ment with its various branches, and also in the foundation of
fresh mystical or even directly “spiritual” groups. There has
never been a time when the old mystical treatises have not been
read and studied, and people are still reading and expounding
them to-day. These movements are undercurrents of religious life
which mostly pass unnoticed ; socially, too, they chiefly affect the
lower classes. To-day, to a great extent, they have joined forces
with spiritism and theosophy; the only new movement in the
grand manner is Swedenborgianism ; Swedenborg was really a
modern Paracelsus, translated into terms of modern natural
science; with his mysticism he combined occultism . 601 But these
ideas, however, did not affect a large number of people: in
America the movement is still in existence ; William James had
leanings in that direction.
fi0 ° See p. 981 .
501 See also on this point Kalbe : Kirchen und Sekten der Gegenwart ; also W. Bruhn :
Theosophie und Theologie, 1907.
PROTESTANTISM
79i
Place of Mysticism within the
Philosophy of Religion
There is, however, another fact to be considered which is more
important for spiritual life in general. This is the presentation of
the ultimate spiritual meaning of mysticism and its place in the
philosophy of religion ; this has become a matter of vital impor-
tance to all the religious people of the present day who are either
outside the churches altogether, or who at least do not belong
specifically to a Church or to a Pietist group. The problem may
be stated thus : when modern thought came under the influence
of the conception of universal world laws, and of a universal world
unity, which meant that morality, religion, and art also had to be
regarded as universal fundamental laws for the spiritual develop-
ment of mankind, the only hope of bridging the gulf between this
type of thought and religion in general and Christianity in
particular, lay in “idealistic” mysticism. Everywhere already
mysticism essentially represents the same phenomenon : a
religious experience based on direct and vital contact with God,
which, in its ethical and religious content, was obviously related
to Christian thought ; further, in the historical elements of
Christianity, mysticism was able to discern an historical incor-
poration and symbolizing of its own ideas in a specially living
and primitive form, in so far as it remained linked with the
historical element at all. All that was necessary was to connect
this mysticism with the general psychological or epistemological
ideas of modern philosophy; this yielded the common funda-
mental conception from which it was possible to open up a way
to the particular within the concrete religions, after the naive
age-long dominion of the positive and particular, that is, of super-
naturally established Christianity, had been shattered. The whole
of modern philosophy tends in this direction.
This, however, meant that the whole historical concrete
element in religion became a problem, and it opened up the
possibility for the most radical solutions. Since, at the same time,
the historical element in religion was incorporated in a general
historical point of view, and was thus open to criticism, very often
the need for release from historical uncertainty led to the demand
for the pure immediacy, present character, and inwardness of the
evangelium aeternum , to the expectation of the Third Dispensation
in which each individual, out of the depths of his own life, inde-
pendently and personally, and yet essentially in agreement with
others, gains his own knowledge of God. The ideas which Sebastian
792 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Franck had expressed with such depth and clarity had again
become operative.
Mysticism of this kind lies at the heart of the philosophy
of religion taught by Leibniz, however deeply orthodox this
reconciler of philosophy and religion appeared. Spinoza had
already taken this path. In a theistic and personal sense Herder
and Goethe took this line ; Goethe had imbibed these ideas from
Church History through Gottfried Arnold. Lessing, too, saved
religion from mere intellectualism and criticism by appealing to
the emotional piety of the Moravians. Kant, who regarded
religion simply as spirit and thought, also treated the story of
Redemption from this point of view, although in other ways he
was purely ethical and theistic and not at all mystically minded ;
his spiritualization of doctrines into symbols of eternal truths and
ever-recurring present processes is entirely in accord with this
kind of spirituality. There is no need to prove this in the case of
Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel ; the two last have drawn explicitly
upon the old mystical religious literature ; and the belated
Gnosticism of Schelling is a “spiritual’ * theory borrowed from
Bohme. Above all, however, in Hamann, Friedrich Heinrich
Jacobi, and Lavater, it is obvious that their infinitely stimulating
ideas spring either from Christian mysticism or directly from
general “spiritual religion” itself. If they figure as the Theistic
and Dualistic opponents of the Monism of the period, the opposi-
tion is still only relative, and within the common whole.
As the Monism of those thinkers was impregnated with the
irrational character of the individual, and was crowned with an
idea of God filled with an ethical content, so the Dualism of these
was no mere Dualism of Natural Law and Christian miracle,
but, rather, of externally mechanical Nature and fullness of the
Spirit, in short of lower and higher nature. In them spirit becomes
genius, and the physical is treated as an external intellectualism
which is calculable and tangible. In them faith is treated as a
feeling which the Presence of God effects in the soul, in which He
alone and all His works can be experienced. It is obvious that
here the old “spiritual” ideas are only being continued, or
renewed, in a fresh form. The religious-philosophical element of
Neo-Platonism, which Christian mysticism had assimilated,
became ever more evident and independent, combined with the
aesthetic colour of Platonism, which Christianity had set aside
entirely, and which modern aesthetic culture has renewed in
such a differentiated manner . 602
502 See p. 981.
PROTESTANTISM
793
The Romantic Movement
In this movement of thought Romanticism was the most im-
portant phenomenon; its religious element was represented by
Schleiermacher and Novalis, and it influenced the whole group
in varying degrees of truth and depth. Everyone who has read
Schleiermacher’s Discourses knows that there is clearly proclaimed
in them the “spiritual” idea of a direct revelation of religious
feeling, and a mutual understanding of all Spirit-filled men and of
all revelations, and that the sociological conclusions are also drawn
quite definitely from these ideas : a system of loosely connected
groups, varying from time to time, gathered round particularly
strong leaders and prophets, serves to unite the faithful in ever
new groupings for mutual fellowship, in order to awaken the
spiritual consciousness which all possess; the “spirit” is not tied
to the historic Christian community, but, reaching out beyond its
borders, it can allow religious feeling, which is in itself everywhere
the same, to form ever new concrete groups. The prophets and
seers, Christ Himself included, are merely those who arouse and
enkindle that spark of direct religious life which is the possession
of every human being.
It is undeniable that this conception has some connection with
Herrnhut, even though the general outlook is determined by the
main features of the modern view of the world, and the whole
tendency towards inwardness and immediacy is intimately con-
nected with the personality of Schleiermacher. However, whether
this is simply an analogy or one which is based on history, the
whole idea is very closely related to Protestant mysticism. In
Novalis, Moravian Ghrist-mysticism was also placed within this
setting; later on, Schleiermacher developed this idea still farther;
here, too, it is, however, a genuine Christ-mysticism, i.e. the
view which regards the whole of life as full of a power which is
only concretely incarnate in Christ; the Lord’s Supper means
that the believer is fed with the materialized and concrete Divine
Spirit, who indwells the universe; the whole rite is a symbol of
the unity between the Spirit and Nature, between the prophet
and the community.
This religious Romanticism possessed two most important new
features: (i) On the one hand, under the influence of modern
conceptions of law and world unity, the dualistic opposition
between the flesh and the spirit disappears, and with that the
asceticism which was so characteristic of the older Protestant
mysticism. Whereas the latter had scarcely reconciled its ascetic
794 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Dualism with the idea of Divine Immanence by means of the
Neo-Platonic theory of Emanations, and further, within this
framework, had made room for the freedom of the creature, the
new Protestant mysticism tended absolutely and directly towards
Immanence and Determinism. Where this was not the case,
freedom is still only the principle of an ascending and victorious
evolution, not that of an ascetic and dualistic opposition between
the redeemed soul and the flesh which is tainted with sin. Hence
the mystical religious philosophy of the present day has a strong
affinity with the Pantheistic idea of Immanence, and the ancient
idea of the opposition between the flesh and the Spirit is trans-
formed into the idea of progress through the stages of an evolu-
tionary process. (2) The second important change is the coales-
cence of the fully developed religious “inwardness” and individual-
ity with the aestheticism of individuality, with the differentiation
of the altogether individual artistic feeling. This far transcends
the aestheticism of Platonism which still always clings to the
universal, of which we hear echoes from time to time in the
Christian mysticism of the Ancient World, and which reappeared
at the Renaissance. Under the influence of Christian thought and
of modern life, this is an extremely differentiated aesthetic of
entirely individualistic feeling. With that it is only too easy to
combine that whole aesthetic relativism which regards every-
thing as right in its own place, and as contributing to the harmony
of the whole. Although Schleiermacher, Novalis, Fichte, Schelling,
and Hegel all strenuously opposed this tendency, it has continued
to grow and increase down to the present day, combined with the
growth of an aesthetic world-outlook, and under the impression
of the extreme variety in history. This double combination,* how-
ever, signifies a most important complement to pure Christian
“inwardness”. Whereas the older mysticism had absorbed the
Neo-Platonic doctrine of deification, and natural philosophy, the
newer mysticism now drew into itself the modern conception of
humanity and aesthetic individualism. This meant that it was
now able to play its part in the practical tasks of modern life . 503
This religious romanticism, together with the aesthetic differen-
tiation and the mysticism which is connected with the philo-
sophical idea of Immanence, is the source of that which the
modern German Protestant of the educated classes can really
assimilate — his understanding of religion in general. This is the
secret religion of the educated classes. Mystical and spiritual litera-
508 Cf. also the article by Koch: <V Beurteilung der modernen Personlichkeitskultur ,
and the reply by J. Muller: Chr. IV., 1908.
PROTESTANTISM
795
ture, therefore, celebrates to-day its resurrection. Lutheranism,
in particular, provides a very fertile soil for these ideas, since from
the outset Lutheranism had certain affinities with this type of
spirituality in its most genuine form. This kind of spirituality
meets with far less understanding in Anglo-Saxon countries and
among Calvinistic peoples ; to them it appears unpractical, anti-
social, non-ecclesiastical, and unethical. Yet from the literature
of the Emerson group, and in the works of Carlyle — (Carlyle’s
spirit was, it is true, actively ethical and not aesthetic) — even
there (among the Anglo-Saxon peoples) this line of thought had
been pursued for a long time : History is a symbol ; thought wells
forth eternally, only reaching special intensity in the heroes of
mankind. Finally the aesthetic spiritual temper entered into
English life through Ruskin and his school ; this has rightly been
described as the end of Puritanism.
The sociological consequences of this fundamental position
soon became evident. The religious community — both the Church
and the conventicle — had lost all significance. Public worship had
become entirely unnecessary, and without any meaning for
religion. The historical element had simply become a symbol, a
means of stimulus, while some went farther and regarded it with
great suspicion. The historical element had almost entirely lost
any connection with public worship; instead it had become a
theme for scientific treatment, a subject for the free play of the
imagination, or a means of stimulating certain moods according
to one’s own private fancies. Literature, poetry, and the old
Philadelphianism, the formation of small groups governed by
personal impressions, took the place of the old fellowship in
worship, just as Schleiermacher describes in his Discourses , only
usually with much less earnestness.
In the meantime also the Naturalistic Monism of modern
nature philosophers, and Brahmanic and Buddhist ideas, added
their quota to this confused mingling of ideas; moreover, all
relation to Christian history, and indeed to Christian Personalism
in general, was thrown into great confusion, or even into a com-
plete break with the past and passionate opposition to it. But
even where this complete severance from the spirit of Christianity
had not taken place, or had not done so consciously, in these
romantic ideas the tendency was to identify Christianity with an
entirely personally differentiated and entirely inward spiritual
religion . 604
604 See p. 983.
796 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Mysticism and Modern Theology
The intellectual formulas of the newer scientific theology, in so
far as they are in touch with the modern mind, and at the same
time are seeking religious warmth and vitality, since Schleier-
macher, Hegel, and de Wette, have also been moving in this
direction. Certainly the need is here more clearly felt of doing
justice to history and to revelation, but only on the fundamental
assumption that salvation is not a static quality, belonging to
institutional religion, but an experience of the union of the soul
with God which is new every time it takes place. Therefore the
meaning of history for faith has also become the central problem
in modern theology. It is more closely related to Meister Eckhart
and Sebastian Franck than it is to Luther and Calvin, and all
that it values in Luther for the present day is his early period
with its “spiritual” teaching. This all means the revival of the
earlier mysticism. Its best ideas have either been foreshadowed
in it or developed from it. It merely transplants them into the
historico-critical method of thought which has arisen meanwhile,
and into the modern knowledge of the world.
This is the theology of subjective experience in contrast to the
theology of objective revelation ; the sole value it assigns to Jesus
is that of serving as the original stimulator of the religious con-
sciousness. This, however, means that so far as the sociological
situation is concerned it renews the experience of the earlier
mysticism. It creates no community, since it possesses neither the
sense of solidarity nor the faith in authority which this requires,
nor the no less necessary fanaticism and desire for uniformity.
It lives in and on communities which have been brought into
existence by other ruder energies; it tries to transform these
groups from confessional unities into mere organizations for
administration, offering a home to very varying minds and
energies. It is opposed to the ecclesiastical spirit by its tolerance,
its subjectivism and symbolism, its emphasis upon the ethical and
religious inwardness of temper, its lack of stable norms and
authorities. Therefore it is obliged to utilize the forms of reorgan-
ization which the more robust period of the State Church com-
pulsion had created and which would have never arisen without
violence.
Sometimes, however, it goes farther still and envisages a new
situation altogether, in which it will no longer be necessary to
connect religion with the decaying churches. Richard Rothe and
Hegel did not prophesy in vain that the Church would become
PROTESTANTISM
797
merged in the State, that is, the complete autonomy of the
religious “mind 5 5 directly united with the collective reason and
its social organization. In an extremely instructive and deeply
thoughtful summary of Church History 5043 Rothe has laid bare
the ultimate tendencies and the most difficult problems con-
nected with this form of spirituality, while at the same time he
argues that this type of spirituality itself is the logical result of
the evolution of Christianity.
Sociological Results of Modern Spiritual Idealism
All these considerations, however, help us to understand the
sociological reaction which followed this Romanticism — the return
to the earlier ecclesiasticism. Even in Novalis this was not an
impulse arising out of Romanticism itself ; on the contrary, it was
an attempt to guard against the relativity and radical individual-
ism which resulted from this type of thought. As Novalis steeped
himself, in his romantic way, in the study of history he realized
the utter poverty of modern Society and of its prevailing religion
in sociological content and the power of producing fellowship.
From this point of view, and not without good reason, the mediae-
val period seemed to him richer and more natural. At the same
time St. Simon also expressed similar views; in his desire to
discover a new form of social order, which he felt to be an urgent
necessity, he turned to religious thought, and held romantic
views of Christianity. French Catholic Romanticism also devel-
oped along similar lines. The romantic outlook on history and
the need for satisfaction through symbolism and imagination was
only^one method of this counter-movement. The true spirit of
Romanticism did not move in this direction at all. The new
ecclesiasticism, therefore, freed itself as soon as possible from these
unsuitable methods, and sought to replace them with others,
which were contained in Pietism or in pure orthodoxy. To-day,
in actual fact, within both the Catholic and Protestant Churches,
the dominating tendency is the very opposite of Romanticism ;
it is the tendency towards institutionalism, authority, and uni-
formity. Nothing is left of Romanticism save its phraseology,
which some theologians like to use who wish to be clever and to be
considered “modern”.
Such a reaction, however, in some form or other, was necessi-
tated by the real nature of Christianity itself, which is never
merely individualistic mysticism, but is always at the same time
an ethical driving-power, a recognition of the fact that fellowship
6043 Sec p. 984.
798 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
is required by the Divine Will, and which, in the form of religion,
can only be nourished by a living form of worship. In some sense
or another, however, this form of worship must be the worship
of Jesus as the Revelation of God. Thus even Schleiermacher
discarded his youthful ideals of an individualistic “spiritual
religion”, and returned to the idea of the Church, centring in
the worship of Christ, as the original source from which religious
energy ever flows forth anew.
In Schleiermacher’s opinion this worship ought to be exercised
within the territorial churches (so long as they exist) in great
congregational freedom and with a large measure of elasticity
for individuals. The whole unified body of the Territorial State
Church ought to be penetrated with a Christian spirit working
out personally through the individual groups for worship. It is the
ideal of a synthesis consisting of the collective spirit of a Church
and an individualistic mysticism, of a popular National Church
and a Congregationalist Independency ; of the worship of Christ
and the shaping of life by the Spirit of Christianity — an ideal
which requires both from the congregations and from the ecclesi-
astical authorities the greatest wisdom and broadmindedness,
circumspection and willingness to renounce one’s personal views ;
for that very reason this ideal was only realized in a kind of
caricature, that is, as the orthodoxy of the Territorial Church
combined with the compulsory toleration of liberal theologians.
The educated laity, therefore, so far as it is attached to Christianity
at all, has in reality a religion without a Church or forms of wor-
ship, a Christianity of “the Spirit” and of disposition, a religion
of humanitarian activity, and an entirely individual interpreta-
tion of the intellectual aspect of religion . 605
The position of Christianity in the modern educated classes is
determined by all these factors. Another point which we must
not overlook is the fact that certain religious types tend to belong
to certain social strata of Society ; this fact has practical significance
and gives to those types their permanent support. Certain sections
of Society desire the sect, its stimulus, and its satisfying socio-
logical organization which gives the individual a share in co-
operative activity. Others again desire the Church because they
believe that it provides those sociological and religious features of
support and authority which form the most favourable equalizing
and reconciling element for the control of the masses. In general,
however, the modern educated classes understand nothing but
mysticism. This is due to the reflex action of the atomistic indi-
505 See p. 985.
PROTESTANTISM
799
vidualism of modern civilization in general, of an individualism
which in non-religious spheres of life is already losing its hold,
and is beginning to develop into its exact opposite. In its depre-
ciation of fellowship, public worship, history, and social ethics this
type of “spiritual religion”, in spite of all its depth and spirituality,
is still a weakened form of religious life, which must be maintained
in its concrete fullness of life by churches and sects, if an entirely
individualistic mysticism is to spiritualize it at all. Thus we are
forced to this conclusion : this conception of Christianity, which
alone meets the needs of the educated classes, assumes the con-
tinuance of other and more concrete living forms of Christianity
as well; it can never appeal to all. Rather, we may even express
the sure conviction that Lessing’s prophecy of the Evangelium
aeternum , and of the knowledge of God as the original and equal
possession of every individual, will never be fulfilled. What the
actual course of development will be, however, and what signifi-
cance this modern type of “spiritual religion” will have for the
future, no one can foretell. To-day the problem of the organiza-
tion of religious groups is more obscure than ever. The growth of
sects and of mystical movements, combined with the problem-
atic character of the relation between Church and State, has
produced a situation analogous to that which existed at the
beginning of the period of the Reformation . 506
This completes our survey of the phenomena of the sect-type
and of idealistic mysticism. Although both these movements differ
essentially from ecclesiastical Protestantism, yet both belong to
Protestantism, since they reveal the ever-renewed aspirations of
the sect and of mysticism which arise out of the Bible, and which
accompany every form of church-type, in their specific and
definite Protestant form, the sect in its final acceptance of the
Protestant idea of the “calling”, and mysticism in its fusion with
Protestant autonomous individualism. Thus we see that their
ideals were already latent within the Protestant churches them-
selves; the idea of the sect on the whole belongs to Calvinism,
while mysticism is more at home within Lutheranism. Through
Pietism, which stands midway between Protestant ecclesiasticism
and sectarian or mystical piety, these tendencies have constantly
506 Cf. my work entitled Die Kirche im Leben der Gegenwart in the collection
which has already been mentioned called Weltanschauung , etc., and the article
Gewissensfreiheit Ch. W., ign ; also my lecture Die Bedeutung der Geschichtlichkeit
Jesu fur den Glauben, igio ; Eucken expresses the same views, a.a.O.s ., 136.
Cf. also Harnack's Dogmengeschichte, 4. Aufl. Ill , pp. go2-go8.
8oo THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
formed the complement of the Church. The early exclusion of
the sectarian and mystical groups (which were connected with the
democratic tendencies of the period) from the main current of the
Reformation did a great deal of harm at that time to the popular
influence of Protestantism, throwing it more than ever upon the
ruling powers for support; this fact again immensely increased
its natural tendency towards the church-type. But the ideas which
had been banished reappeared; they then produced the Pietist
movement, which has had a deep influence upon the churches
until the present day, the independent sect-movement, and the
idea of Christian Social reform, as well as that type of “spiritual
religion ’ 5 which is either free from the Church or indifferent
to it . 607
Social Philosophy of Mysticism and
“Spiritual Religion 55
Finally, all that we now have to do is to formulate the social
doctrines of these groups and their sociological significance. All
that is required, therefore, is a brief summary of the various
observations which have already been made, and a definition of
the relation of these social doctrines to those of Catholicism,
Lutheranism, and the primitive Calvinism of Geneva.
Spiritual idealism and mysticism — to begin with the subject
which we have just been studying — has no impulse towards
organization at all. Only in so far as these groups retain their
hold on ethical Christian Theism (and among the Quietistic
and Pantheistic groups only under the pressure of the ineradicable
natural urge towards fellowship) do these movements produce any
form of independent social organization as the outcome of their
religious ideas. As a rule people of this type care solely for the
individual and his eternal welfare, while they believe at the same
time in the universal fellowship of the spirit in love. Under
certain circumstances they emphasize this idea of universal
spiritual fellowship, but the idea of the Church and of religious
organization is alien to their thought. Within that “communion
of the spirit”, however, they only form narrower groups of a
brotherhood [Philadelphian] kind, or of select circles of spiritual
leaders and experts. The sense of need for public worship and an
historical basis, in which churches and sects find the rallying-point
of their organization, is not evident; it either disappears out of
607 Cf. also Gobel , /, p. 145. This is also the right element in Barge's Gesamtan -
schauung vom Verlauf der Reformation , which manifests very little understanding
of the Church-type, but is accurate in its main characteristics.
PROTESTANTISM
801
sight altogether, or it is changed into a strong emphasis upon a
personal direct relation with God and Christ, or into spiritual
exaltation. It is, of course, true to say that these tendencies have a
sociological fundamental theory, a union of the hearts of all in
one common aim, and a complete toleration of all other souls on
an equal basis, because, as Lagarde says, “upon the ascent
towards God the various lines do not cut across each other but
converge and meet”. People of this type, however, do not carry
this fundamental theory systematically and actively into Society.
This fundamental theory is of value only for those who are
seeking and experiencing God, and for those who are illuminated
by Him, and its power can only be extended as the Spirit is shed
abroad in the hearts of men. Here nothing can be planned and
organized. The question is only how far this spirit will work of
itself, and in this respect individuals differ according to tempera-
ment. Resignation, a sense of superiority, pessimism, Quietism,
and optimistic expectations all have their place within this
movement. The result is, naturally, that there is a complete
indifference, or impotence towards all social problems which lie
outside the directly religious sphere. Fundamentally, this school
of thought has no idea at all of the way in which to deal with
questions of the State or of economics ; it only knows that every-
thing ought to be altered and begun entirely afresh. When? And
how? It is, indeed, hard to say. As we can understand, it is only
within the sphere of the sex ethic and of the family that this type
of thought displays features which are peculiar to itself, since
these matters are very closely connected with an entirely personal
intimate valuation of life. In this respect it is very independent
and unconventional. Its aim is to spiritualize these most important
processes, which have such a strong influence on the emotional
life ; it wishes to effect the fusion of the erotic with the ethical and
religious element. This is the reason for those phenomena known
as Antinomianism and Libertinism, of which, both rightly and
wrongly, these circles have constantly been accused. To-day it is
just these circles which deal most finely with the problem of sex
ethics. The spirit of restraint and the possibility of penetrating
erotic relationships with religious feeling, or also, on the contrary,
ascetic misgivings about the erotic competition of feeling, are here
emphasized, and from this standpoint they develop marriage
ideals which are in strong opposition to the conventional legal
“property-regarding” viewpoint of marriage, which is legitimate
from the standpoint of the Church. The very fluctuating details
connected with this point of view could only be described within
VOL. II. z
802 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the framework of a monograph, but they would present many
features of great interest. In any case, the connection between
erotic and religious feeling which in this interior subjectivity
makes possible a mutual penetration of both, and which does
away with the coarse ecclesiastical doctrine of concupiscence as
the result of the Fall, is important. When, however, great idealistic
mystical thinkers of recent times, like Schleiermacher and Richard
Rothe, deal with ethics in connection with the practical tasks of
civilization, their ideas proceed obviously and avowedly from the
modern world of thought. The difficulty, then, is how to fuse this
world of thought with Christian spirituality and its supernatural
character. Rothe, in particular, is a very characteristic example
of the difficulty of this task . 608
Turning to the question of the sect, we find that it falls into the
same divisions which characterized it in the Middle Ages: the
aggressive, world-reforming type, and the type which endures
persecution and contempt with patience and is indifferent to
the world.
Social Doctrines of the Aggressive Sects
The aggressive type with its apocalyptic violence burnt itself
out in the seventeenth century, but through the Great Rebellion
in England it has certainly exerted an immense influence on
world history. The only relic of it which now remains is that
Christian Socialism which, logically or otherwise, and by very
varied methods, attempts to bring in a new order of Society which
shall be in harmony both with the Will of God and with reason.
In Catholicism, which in any case only takes up this problem
in inter-confessional groups, the sect-type has been almost entirely
obliterated. There, ultimately, the idea is simply to introduce a
new class into the social organism which is directed by the Church,
whose inner harmony will thus be restored by the grace and power
given to the Church and to its controlling authority; naturally
that docs not exclude a very energetic and successful activity
along certain lines, all the more since it has the immense influence
of the Church behind it.
Within Calvinism, Christian Socialism finds its main expression
in the formation of associations, in the endeavour to influence
public opinion, and in the establishment of co-operative societies.
Within Lutheranism, where it had no point of contact within the
churches at all, it has had the greatest development in theory.
There also, however, it falls into two sections : first there is the
608 See p. 986.
PROTESTANTISM
803
school of thought which merely tries to influence the general
ethical temper and to bring the spirit of reconciliation into the
class war, and there is another, which believes that a socialistic
renewal of the whole constitution of Society is a Christian duty ;
and which believes that this movement should be incorporated
into the steady upward march of progress which is willed by God.
Of course it is only natural that particular social and ethical
problems should pale in importance before these general prob-
lems, which are of fundamental significance. Either they break
up into an infinite number of questions of detail, or they disappear
altogether in the very vague and general sketch of a future social
order. Their special features, which, in part, are very instructive,
could only be made clear in a special monograph . 60824
In our present inquiry all that matters is that we should gain
a thorough insight into the association of ideas. This study,
however, throws much light on the whole problem of the relation
of Christianity to the idea of social reform, and forms a definite
conclusion to the observations on this subject, which have already
been stated.
In this respect the Gospel was completely ideological and
indifferent towards the world, whose transformation it only ex-
pected from the great miracle of the coming Kingdom of God ;
in great things as in small it left everything entirely to God ; the
only thing which was taken into account was the view that the
poor and the suffering were in a more advantageous position than
others, since they feel more warmly and humbly towards God;
beyond that it regarded every act of love which the opportunity
required as the exercise of the right attitude towards God. The
Ancient Church absorbed the world into its own life, making a
few absolutely necessary changes while it preserved a spirit of
interior detachment from it, and in order to overcome material
distress it began the work of philanthropy.
The mediaeval period produced a relative harmony between
the actual situation and the Christian ideal ; but it only developed
the dominion of the Church over this life-harmony of Nature and
Supernature, and dealt with social wrongs no longer through the
Church and the congregation, but through institutional monastic
charity, which was made possible by the endowment system.
Lutheranism left all secular questions to a government which
was guided by the Gospel, leaving it to struggle with the existing
difficulties as best it could, certain that the Gospel possesses the
* 08a On this point see the various works of Ragaz and Rauschcnbusch, which
have already been mentioned above.
804 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
power to inspire and establish the order of Nature through
love.
Calvinism, which had adopted the sect-ideal of the Holy
Community, and had come to terms with the State Church spirit,
for the first time, alongside of the sects, set a Christian social
ideal in the forefront of its life ; it did this, however, in a thoroughly
conservative sense ; it held that the existing civil order of the State
should be maintained, on the assumption that this social order,
guided by relative Natural Law, along with good-will and the
necessary earnestness in the pursuit of holiness, could be made
the foundation of a truly Christian social order.
The idea of a radical social reform, which regards the existing
order of Society and property as radically incapable of developing
Christian personality and Christian love in any comprehensive
way, was held only by the sects, and by them only in the measure
in which they passed from patient endurance of persecution, under
the influence of the eschatological idea of the Kingdom of God
and in the expectation of its speedy realization, into the attitude
of a thoroughgoing reform according to the ideal of the Kingdom
of God and of primitive Reason. Further, the more the idea of the
Natural Law of the Stoics agreed with these hopes, the more this
reform became democratic and communistic. These were the sole
supporters of a Christian social ethic which was radical, allowed
no compromise, and did not accept the existing social order.
Then Christian Socialism arose, with its penetrating criticism
of the existing social order. It threw out a clear challenge, claim-
ing that the urgency of the situation demanded either a radical
change in the fundamental social outlook, or the destruction of
the present economic system in order to make room for a new
social order, which would be in harmony with the ideals which
also dominate the Socialistic Reform parties, groups which have
sprung into existence under the pressure of the economic situa-
tion. These demands show, however, that Christian Socialism
again is fired with the old spirit of the aggressive sect; like it,
it interprets the movements of the day as a challenge to change
the whole principle of the existing order, a change which can
be effected by God alone; it renews the hope of realizing the
Kingdom of God upon earth, and revives the sense of the in-
timate connection between mind and body; and its ideals bear
a close resemblance to the ancient Stoic-Christian conceptions
of absolute Natural Law. Modem ideas of Immanence, and of
the importance of secular civilization, have also had some in-
fluence upon it. It regards itself as the product of intellectual,
PROTESTANTISM
805
cultural, and technical development. For Christian Socialism,
therefore, the day of ascetic “Enthusiasm” and Dualism is past.
No longer, like the early sects, does it supplement the social
message of the Gospel by ideas drawn from the Old Testament
and the Apocalypse, but it utilizes the conclusions of modern
social science, and the technological conception of progress. It
therefore renounces the apocalyptic revolutionary idea of violence,
and looks for a revolution only from within. In so doing, however,
it severs itself from the Church of the present day not so much
from the actual institution as from its inner spirit. On the whole,
the Church requires the masses to acquiesce in existing social
conditions because they have been appointed by God ; moreover,
since it is essentially on the side of law and order, its only idea
of social reform is charitable activity and a Christian control of
the civil order. Socialistic churches are nonsense. The task
of the Church is something different from radical-ethical en-
deavour and the re-ordering of life. But a Christian Socialism
which is separate from the Church in spirit can appeal to the
Gospel. The Christian piety of the churches is inwardly very
different in its outlook from that of a free community, earnestly
endeavouring to bring in the Kingdom of God. At the same time,
of course, there are numerous points of contact between the two
schools of thought. The heart of the problem, however, lies in
the contrast between an ecclesiastical institution realistically
focused towards mankind and a free voluntary community
unconditionally striving after the ideal.
The Non-Aggressive Sect and Neo-Calvinism
Th£ passive persecuted sect is represented by the Mennonites,
the Baptists, the Quakers, the groups which came into being
through Pietism, and the modern sects. It also has assumed a
different character from that of its mediaeval and early Pro-
testant ancestors, like the Waldensians, the Bohemian Brethren,
and the early Protestant Baptists. They have given up their
previous attitude of passive resistance, and have accepted the
State, Society, and the economic order. Based on the Protestant
ethic of the “calling”, they have all developed into groups
which, in the sociological sense, must be described as “bourgeois”,
and which therefore accept existing conditions. Their only con-
tribution to social reform lies in the sphere of Home Missions
through evangelistic work and social service, coupled with an
influence on Society through Christian public opinion and the
Press. This middle-class development, and the adoption of the
806 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
ethic of the “calling”, is a natural result of the change in its
own position, due to a more settled existence, increase in
numbers, and the inheritance of stable conditions, as well as to
an inevitably intimate connection with the immensely powerful
organism of modern political and economic life, which can no
longer, as in the anarchy and simplicity of mediaeval life, leave
untouched islands to exist in its current. Another important
factor in their development has been their Calvinistic environ-
ment. Both in their own sociological process of evolution and in
their social ethic they have grown into a very close relationship
with Calvinism, or, rather, with Neo-Calvinism. On the other
hand, Neo-Calvinism itself has entirely severed its connection
with the State, and on the ethical side it has been fused with
these sects to such an extent that it is practically impossible to
distinguish them from each other. The main question, however,
in which these sects still differ from the churches is that of
freedom from the State, and the demand for the ecclesiastical
neutrality of the State; but since the churches are now being
separated from the State in any case, this question is naturally
less urgent than formerly.
It is not difficult to see why these sects have followed this line
of development. The passive persecuted sect is only possible as
an interim organization, while it awaits the Divine Revelation
of the Kingdom. If, however, these bodies give up this “waiting”
attitude, and accept the existing world-order as something per-
manent, they then adopt a relative standard, and make their
own compromise with the world. Of necessity, therefore, they
then develop in the direction either of the churches or of the
radical sects, or they die out. Thus they have become ecclesiastical
and bourgeois, just as Calvinism, on the contrary, has become
Free Church and legalistic. From the point of view of religious
sociology they have become churches, founded, like the true
churches, upon the doctrine of sin and grace ; the only difference
is that, either in theory or in practice, their ideal of Church
membership is stricter than that of the churches.
As churches, therefore, which by the very fact of their separa-
tion proclaim their independence, their freedom from the State,
and the sovereign power of religion over against a secular
civilization, and as highly individualistic organizations based on
personal conviction and on conscious, systematic ethical achieve-
ment, they evolve from within a sociological fundamental theory
which may be described as the uniting of individuals in a com-
mon spirit, which is not the sum but the product of the uniting
PROTESTANTISM
807
individual will, which only exists in and through its active work.
In one particular direction this spirit of the whole absorbs into
itself the will of each individual, in order that that may again
be affected by the spirit of the whole ; in other directions, how-
ever, it is left free to work out other social ideas in its own way.
It is no sterile individualism, nor is it an institutional spirit,
which produces and supports the individual, but it is a vital
process of interaction between the individuals who compose the
society ’and the product of this union.
The idea of fellowship is not determined by inherited moods
and feelings, by a fixed framework of life which maintains itself
by its own miraculous power, in which currents of feeling sway
to and fro between active strenuous effort and passive adherence,
but by the Divine purpose of Life — clearly recognized and sys-
tematically realized, making demands on every single soul, yet
transcending all — the Holy Community, the authentication of
grace, preparation for the future life. This is a curious blend of
the ecclesiastical and the sectarian spirit, in which the latter is
the stronger. Actively and visibly exercised first and foremost
within a religious fellowship, this spirit spreads outwards to the
whole of life as a sociological fundamental theory which similarly
defines the State, the communes, and the whole infinitely sub-
divided group-life. This produces a certain affinity with Demo-
cracy and Liberalism, but without the rationalist demand for
equality, and also without the revolutionary spirit which is
peculiar to the democracy of the Latin peoples. This kind of
individualism, indeed, tends to be absolutely conservative, since
it upholds with care the delicate balance between the individual
and Society (as a constitution), and endeavours to secure it as
far as possible from all disturbance. These are matters which
force themselves upon the attention of every observer of American
life; they also characterize English Dissent. These peculiarities
are usually explained as Anglo-Saxon racial characteristics,
whereas in reality these racial characteristics have themselves
been produced by the discipline and education of Calvinism . 509
Ascetic Protestantism
Thus the development of Calvinism into Puritanism and the
Free Churches, combined with the development of the Baptist
movement into a bourgeois body, and the development of the
609 Cf. the study by Max Weber , which has already been quoted several times,
on Kirche und Sekte in Nordamerika ; there is a certain amount of material also
in Tocqueville and Bryce: The American Commonwealth 9 , 1903.
808 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Pietistic sects on ecclesiastical lines, has produced that collective
Protestant group which has already been described above as
“ascetic Protestantism”, in order to distinguish it from Lutheran-
ism and Catholicism. At this point we again pick up the thread
which we had to drop at the close of the last section.
It has already been made abundantly clear that Lutheranism
taught that labour in a calling was both a service rendered to
God and an outward expression of brotherly love. On the other
hand, by its emphasis upon the purely inward aspect of religion,
its lack of a clear standard of moral behaviour, and its acquies-
cence in the conditions of life which were created by Natural
Law, but were often extremely unchristian, it was not able,
on its own initiative, to bring about a coherent and systematic
transformation of social life in general. Neither in theory nor
in its attitude to life does it possess a systematic ethic. Again and
again Lutheranism casts aside its asceticism (which it also pos-
sesses as the corollary of the doctrine of Original Sin), and gives
itself up to repose in the blessedness of the Divine Mercy, and
to the thankful enjoyment of Divine gifts in all that is good and
beautiful, and whenever it becomes dubious about the world and
about sin it withdraws into the refuge of its inner happiness of
justification through faith.
Catholicism, on the other hand, likewise values the cosmos
of the vocational system as the means of natural existence ap-
pointed by Natural Law. But this system of callings is applicable
to the conditions of natural existence, and is thus merely the lower
degree of that higher supernatural ethic, which inwardly is no
longer connected with the claims of the active life, but which in
the life of contemplation attains the highest degree of supernuture
or grace.
Ascetic Protestantism and the “Calling”
Ascetic Protestantism, however, regards the “calling” as a
proof, and the ardent fulfilment of one’s professional duty as the
sign and token of the state of grace. Accordingly it gathers all
the work of the “calling” into a coherent system of the utmost
concentration of human faculties on the aim of the “calling”,
which is appointed to the individual through his providential
position within the system. The principles and ideals of Ascetic
Protestantism may therefore be summarized thus: the inner
severance of feeling and enjoyment from all the objects of labour;
the unceasing harnessing of labour to an aim which lies in
the other world, and therefore must occupy us till death; the
PROTESTANTISM
809
depreciation of possessions, of all things earthly, to the level of
expediency; the habit of industry in order to suppress all dis-
tracting and idle impulses ; and the willing use of profit for the
religious community and for public welfare; these principles,
which may vary in detail, are all in the main similar in character,
and to a considerable extent also they have been and are being
realized . 610
Social Doctrines of Ascetic Protestantism
These principles also help us to understand the social doctrines
of Ascetic Protestantism, which affect the sphere of life which
lies outside religion. Under this head I include Neo-Calvinism,
whose social teaching, for the same reason, has not been described
in detail . 6103
Tiie Sex Ethic
The sex ethic is, of course, concerned with the preservation of
the strict purity of family life. All sexual intercourse before
marriage and outside the marriage state is strictly forbidden.
This, of course, is the ordinary Christian point of view. Never-
theless, the ethic of the family itself is conceived in a very peculiar
way. Asceticism, namely, demands the excision of all those erotic
and emotional elements which Catholicism and Lutheranism had
always believed they ought to tolerate as the sensuality resulting
from Original Sin. The sex life of marriage was to them medicina
libidinis . Here, however, it is firmly incorporated into the aim
of the community to serve the glory of God. The life of sex is
not tef be used for enjoyment, but for the deliberate procreation
of children. It is not an aim in itself, but it serves the continued
growth of Society and the Church. Further, the production of
children involves the duty of bringing up useful members of
Society and believing members of the Church; this naturally
implies the duty of providing a suitable education. It was Pietism
and the sects which evolved the idea of a systematic, useful, and
practical education, and which established schools for this
purpose.
The relation between the sexes, conceived in a very indivi-
dualistic way, softens the severity of Patriarchalism ; woman
especially, in the Baptist movement, gains her religious and
therefore her social independence. From time to time the sects
(like the mystics) have their feminine preachers and leaders of
510 Sec p. 986. 8103 Cf. above, p. 691.
8io THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
meetings. In the Calvinistic “Prophesyings” and conventicles of
Voet, women were allowed to take a public part. In the com-
munity of Jean de la Badie, women, and especially the famous
Anna von Schtirmann, played a decided and independent part.
Together with other reasons, the well-known position of woman
in America is also connected with her religious position. It is
only natural that in the whole effort to attain a more stable and
more deliberate attitude towards life the attitude of children
towards their parents should also become more independent.
Schools and meetings for children, with the development of an
independent esprit de corps and of independent responsibility, reveal
the educational ideal of these groups. The Sunday School move-
ment within the churches, the Young Men’s Christian Associa-
tion, and other similar movements all tend in this direction. The
effect of this education, intensified by a democratic way of life,
is one of the most striking phenomena which attract the attention
of the European visitor to America . 511
The Political Ethic
The political ethic, likewise, regards the State from a purely
utilitarian standpoint. In this matter Calvinistic Natural Law
prepared the way which was trodden later by the sects and the
Free Churches. The only right the State has to exist is for the
sake of order and of discipline, and thus to provide a basis for
Society. The purely political conception of the State as an ethical
end in itself, which was self-evident to the Ancient World, and
which has reappeared within the modern world, does not come
into the picture at all. This essentially utilitarian and essentially
social, non-political conception of the State is indeed, as we have
already seen in various ways, likewise a common Christian idea.
It is the natural result of the transference of all true life-values
into the religious sphere, which means that even in the most
favourable light the rest of the life-values are only regarded as
means to an end. Ascetic Protestantism, however, on the basis
of rationalistic Natural Law, which, like the Puritan ethic, it
instinctively takes over from Calvinism, goes much farther than
Lutheranism and Catholicism.
In Catholicism the State belongs to the natural stage of exis-
tence, above which there rises the supernatural stage of Grace,
which is completely indifferent to the State. In Catholicism,
therefore, the State is sometimes utilized and glorified, sometimes
511 See p. 987.
PROTESTANTISM
811
treated merely as the material for and presupposition of some-
thing else, sometimes shorn of all authority and trampled under
foot by the world-organization of the Church.
In Lutheranism the State is also a part of the natural order,
but as such it is a necessary form of the activity of Christian love
and of the Christian spirit ; but since it is still essentially a pro-
duct of the natural evolution of reason which punishes and heals
sin, and as such is guided by God, it gains (whether harmful
or useful to the Christian aim of life) the supernatural dignity
of a power which has been directly appointed by God, which,
above all, must be endured and respected.
Early Calvinism, like Lutheranism, had an equally strong sense
of authority, and only permitted a subsidiary ideal of utilitarian-
rational interference in circumstances where the ruling powers
of the State were unchristian in their behaviour. Those excep-
tional conditions, however, were not to be allowed to continue
long, but as soon as possible they were to yield to an organized
authority, and restore the social unity controlled by a State
Church.
In Ascetic Protestantism, on the contrary, the organization of
the State is likewise in principle deduced from the Natural Law
of the fallen state, but it is always estimated according to its
rational purpose, and subordinated to its responsibility not merely
to God, but also to the people from whom it has received its
mandate, whether legally or merely morally. The social unity
controlled by a State Church has disappeared ; the State no longer
takes a direct part in the vital interests of the Christian churches
and denominations ; moreover, it has thus been forced down to
the level of mere human expediency. The honours, offices, and
dignities of the State are functions appointed by God and the
people, but they do not proceed from inherent divine right
within the government. No honours may be paid to a creature
which would encroach upon the homage to be paid to God, and
at bottom all are only functionaries of Providence in the natural
cosmos of Society, which is designed to serve the glory of God
by a way of life which is based on strict Christian principles.
Within the State, therefore, there is a strong sense of the equality
of all in the presence of God, a sense which is expressed par-
ticularly strongly only in the well-known customs of the Quakers,
but which is in no sense an equalitarian view like that of the
European democracy. This is prevented by the idea of Providence,
which looks upon the social and political cosmos as divided by
God, for the express purposes of Salvation, into different groups,
812 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
faculties, and positions in life. This strong emphasis upon Provi-
dence is a relic of the doctrine of Predestination.
We may thus sum up the main features of the attitude of
Ascetic Protestantism towards the State: it is inclined towards
a liberal or democratic conception of the State, apart from
equalitarian theories; it tends to regard the State simply as
something which must be endured; it glorifies its own national
inheritance more for its religious mission than for its political
greatness; and it likes to regulate international relationships
according to peace principles, which are also reasonable, and
from the business point of view desirable. Ascetic Protestantism
views imperialistic and nationalistic movements with a good deal
of misgiving. Sometimes it rejects them on principle; sometimes
it is able to justify them as an extension of Christian civilization
whose sole genuine representative it feels itself to be ; it has been
entrusted with this destiny by God. It then regards itself in the
light of the Old Testament as a “Chosen People”, and absorbs
Imperialism into the aim of Foreign Missions . 5113
The Economic Ethic
The economic ethic, finally, teaches (likewise from the general
Christian point of view) that labour is the result of the Fall, and
is to be regarded as the penalty and the discipline of sin. But
this idea is here developed into that of a rational, systematic
discipline of labour, evolved, above all, in Puritanism, and thence
taken over in a more or less logical manner; this ethic regards
laziness and idleness as the source of all evil, and the result of a
failure to impose discipline. With this systematic view of work (to
which, incidentally, other than Puritan motives were sometimes
added, as, for instance, among the Quakers the waiting and self-
preparation for the Divine illumination), a strong and systematic
impulse was given to production, while, on the other hand, with
the same asceticism there is united a considerable limitation of
consumption and a complete avoidance of all luxury (at least,
of all that is obvious and that ministers to vanity and arrogance).
It is only at this point that we see the full effect of that which
has already been described as the favourable ethical disposition
of Calvinism for bourgeois Capitalism. Thus this economic ethic
became middle-class, one might almost say lower middle-class-
capitalist, and it bore all the signs of the results of the capitalistic
attitude towards life: systematic division of labour, emphasis
upon specialization, the feeling for advantage and profit, the
511a See p. 988.
PROTESTANTISM
813
abstract duty of work, the obligation towards property as towards
something great, which ought to be maintained and increased
for its own sake. The owner of wealth or property is “the Lord’s
Steward”, and administers a Divine gift which has been entrusted
to him. An ethic of this kind placed at the disposal of the nascent
modern bourgeois Capitalism both energetic and courageous
entrepreneurs , and men who were willing to endure exploitation
if only they could get work. This ethic differs from the Capitalism
of antiquity and of the later Middle Ages by those very features
which have just been described, and alongside of it the other
existing kinds of Capitalism, of course, must not be overlooked.
This type of Capitalism, however, preserves its special Christian
character by its taboo on pleasure-seeking and self-glorification,
the sense of the duty of work for the service of God, strict honesty
and reliability, the humane obligation to make provision for the
workers and to give respect to employers, and the extensive use
of wealth for philanthropic ends.
The system of fixed prices, the standardization and classifica-
tion of goods according to their quality, the building up of
. business upon the strictest formal honesty, the principle “honesty
is the best policy” — all arose at this point. It is the expression
of a spiritual and moralistic opposition to the guild system and
to unfair dealing in individual cases; it means that the life of
business is constructed upon the calculation of the individual in
relation to an abstract circle of purchasers, and upon the absolute
necessity for correctness and honesty as regards estimates and
deliveries. The inscription on the Bremen Exchange, which states
that the merchant is the most honest man, should be interpreted
from* this point of view. The justification for the economic life
lies in its value to the community, and in this sense it can be
considered a blessing ; in itself, however, the ideal attitude is that
of the man whose spirit is inwardly entirely independent of
possessions. It is even possible to go a step farther and to exalt
poverty, which preserves from the dangers of wealth, just as, on
the other hand, wealth, used in a Christian way, preserves the
community from misery and want. Thus here also there is no
idea of equality. This is prevented by the whole idea of Provi-
dence, and above all, where it was still a vital force, by the idea
of Predestination. The conception is always that of a cosmos
directed by God, in which the Christian Ethos only works itself
out through reciprocal activities, division of labour, a variety of
gifts and capacities. Thus, as Calvinism and the sects are of one
mind on the question of the development of a voluntary Church,
814 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
and on the question of separation between Church and State,
so also their views coincide in the economic ethic of secular
asceticism which determines the ethic of Ascetic Protestantism,
renouncing its greater earlier freedom: Calvinism reaches this
point of view under the urgent sense of need to prove in daily
life the reality of its faith, and it therefore produces the systematic
asceticism of labour ; the passive, persecuted sect comes to this
point by giving up its hostility towards the world, and by fusing
its ascetic detachment from the world with the Protestant idea
of the “calling”. Further, both movements shared the following
experience : on account of their Nonconformity and their freedom
from the State, they were forcibly excluded from all official
positions in the State and from its dignities; thus they were
thrust out of the ruling classes and obliged to join the bourgeois
middle class ; this still further intensified the bourgeois capitalist
element. Agriculture was not excluded, but it was only practised
by the people of this class by farming, and by trading in property
in land; but it has nothing to do with the feudal ownership of
land.
Thus the difference between this ethic and that of the theo-
retical traditional economic ethic of Catholicism is clear. In this
ethic, work and possessions belong to the natural sphere alone;
the desire for gain does not directly concern the religious ethic
at all ; gain is regarded merely as a method of providing for one’s
needs according to one’s rank in Society; whatever is earned
beyond that should be used for charity ; the most genuine charity,
however, is actually exercised by those who possess nothing at
all, by those who stand outside the ordinary work of the world
altogether.
The difference between this economic ethic and that of
Lutheranism is equally clear. Lutheranism, it is true, makes the
task of earning a living part of the “calling” to brotherly love,
but, in spite of this, it gives preference to the callings which
belong to a settled order of Society consisting of agricultural
labourers, manual workers, and officials; Capitalism and the
calculating spirit which is continually striving to make more
money is regarded by Lutheranism with detachment and extreme
misgiving.
But even contrasted with primitive Calvinism, to which, with
its State Church point of view, all methods of gaining a livelihood
were of equal importance, which had not developed the asceticism
of labour to this extent, and which had no trace of the lower
middle-class spirit at all — this was something new. This was the
PROTESTANTISM
815
result of that asceticism in which the Puritan, legalistic, organiz-
ing Calvinism came into contact with those sects which were
comparatively ready to accept secular civilization; it was also
the result of the social and political situation in which both
Calvinism and the sects found themselves over against the official
world . 512
Ascetic Protestantism and its Relation to
General Historical Development
Surveying all these developments as a whole, it is plain that
the Christian social philosophy of Puritan Calvinism, of Pietism
and the sects, and, to some extent, even that of the mystical
groups, is a great unity, which, for historical significance can
only be compared with the social philosophy of the Middle Ages.
As in the Middle Ages, the main point for us is the theory, the
intellectual orientation of a Christian work of civilization, and
a Christian organization of Society. Here, as there, convinced
supporters of the system, who are vitally concerned, will be in
the minority. But they blaze a trail in the realm of thought, and
they create ways of thinking which come to be accepted as obvious
and natural, within which the general Christian consciousness
and a unified attitude towards life can live and move; it does
not then matter how much real seriousness there is behind each
individual instance of this behaviour. The great problem of
Christian supernaturalism — that of uniting and adapting itself
to the practical life of Society — was solved in each instance on
a great scale and in a popularly effective way: in Catholicism,
by means of a universal Church, which regulates, supervises, and
finally itself effects the ascent of Nature to Grace; in ascetic
Protestantism, by a highly individualistic congregational system
which was in harmony with modern individualism, and through
the ascetic self-control of individuals who reduce the whole of
secular and social life to the level of a mere method of glorifying
God and proving the state of grace. Thus there are certain points
of contact between the two systems, since both express the
Christian hostility to the world in a systematic discipline and
in asceticism . 613 They still differ fundamentally, however, since
Catholicism places its ascetic ideal in opposition to the lower
618 See p. 988.
618 For analogies with Protestant asceticism in the monasteries so far as they
introduce labour and in so doing develop systematic self-discipline, see Max
Weber; Archiv XXI , 28 ff. ; for occasional union of mysticism with the ethic of
the “calling* * as a means of discipline, see XX, 50, and XXI, 22,
816 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
stage of life in the world ; therefore, the consequences of this lower
degree break through everywhere, giving to the actual highest
achievements of asceticism a directly legalistic, mortifying
character. Protestant asceticism, on the contrary, gathers directly
all the material of the natural life into the supernatural aim;
thus it here loses its self-mortifying and dualistic character, and
becomes a systematic work for the salvation of souls and for the
Kingdom of God, within the setting of a secular “calling”.
Lutheranism certainly did not finally close the circle so firmly,
and the idealistic mysticism which in some ways is so closely akin
to it fell back very frequently into a purely dualistic asceticism
with its emphasis upon mortification.
On the other hand, this inquiry closes with Puritan Calvinism
and the “purified” communities of the sects. To what extent they
will be able to dominate the modern civilized world permanently
in a Christian manner is another question. This school of thought
is still a power in worldhistory. But it is clear on all hands that
to a great extent the State, Society, and economic life will no
longer allow themselves to be dominated by it, and in their
present position cannot possibly be dominated by it any longer.
Faced by all these considerations, we arrive at the last question
of all — going beyond the immediate subject — the question of the
connection between these views of general social conditions and
their effect upon the whole of civilization. This question can only
be answered with the utmost reserve, since, ist : until now the
facts have only been known in part, and, 2nd : the perpetually
fluctuating power and range of influence makes it very difficult
to give any certain interpretation of the facts . 514
“Spiritual religion” or mysticism is not a product of particular
social conditions. It proceeds from other causes: the experience
of the incapacity of the churches to realize their ideal, weariness
of the strife and conflict of religious parties, the pure inner dialectic
of religious feeling returning to its ultimate source, the critical
destruction of dogmas and cults, and weariness of the disappoint-
ments and confusions of the external life in general. Thus of itself
it has no social influence upon life in general. Its inner circles
do not penetrate into the masses, and its purely contemplative
ideas do not grip the common life, but work purely personally,
or hover in a literary manner over the whole. In modern times
614 On the whole subject, which gathers up all his earlier ideas (in Archiv XX
and XXI , and in the article in the Chr, W.) and carries them out further, see
Weber's Schlusswort , XXXI , pp. 584-508. Cf. also, above, the exposition of
asceticism, pp. 604-605.
PROTESTANTISM
817
certainly, its extension depends upon the existence of classes
which live apart from the crude struggle for existence, and can
seek spiritual refinement for their own sake, so far as it is not
hidden in small evangelical sects, which also, however, have
always a special sectarian trait. Beyond that it is connected with
the modern scientific cultivation of the autonomous reason, in
so far as this takes a religious turn. To this extent it reflects to-day
the universal individualism of modern times, which indeed it
still further strengthens. It accompanies social conditions, but
does not arise out of them, nor does it influence them directly.
Indirectly, however, the fact that it weakens the power and ex-
clusiveness of the churches means that it has a very important
social influence.
The ideal of the radical sects, on the contrary, was never
developed out of the purely inward dialectic of Christian thought.
In its primitive form, Christian thought left all such matters too
much to a future which was to be brought about by God, even
though it was expected that this would soon be realized, and
it left all details in God’s Hands, and not to the consideration
and organization of man. After the Christian faith had adjusted
itself to the present world and had become a Church, the ex-
pectation of a complete ethical world-renewal could only be
introduced into Christianity from outside through the pressure
of intolerable conditions ; and, somehow or other, that inevitably
implied human thought and human organization. Particularly
threatening social and political conditions were then held to be
the signs of world-renewals which were about to come, as a
challenge to prepare the way of the Lord for the Kingdom of
God ; it was a mingled attitude of believing expectation of the
Kingdom, and an actual effort to cause the new conditions.
The sect-ideal, therefore, only rose to the heights of its power
when the existing conditions required reform, when the history
of the period seemed to point to some catastrophic event which
God was about to bring to pass, which thus reawakened the
expectation of the coming of the Kingdom of God.
Thus the ideal of the radical sect is always aroused only by
the course of general social development. This is true also of
modem Christian Socialism, which was only brought into exist-
ence first of all by the revelation of the results of the capitalist
system, and, above all, by the great Socialist Movement ; in its
most advanced groups, in fact, the Socialist Movement is inter-
preted as a sign of a world-upheaval willed by God.
For that very reason, therefore, the influence of Christian
vol. n. AA
818 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Socialism is always of a secondary nature, being exerted along-
side those more general movements, which it merely interprets,
appropriates, and rectifies. Christianity does not breed social
revolution. It can only adjust itself, with a certain sense of strain,
to the modern social revolution, which, although it is not violent,
is still very radical in principle. The aim of Christian Socialism
is to effect a change in the hearts and minds of men which is
orientated towards God, and not towards the world. The modern
realization of the fact that spiritual values are intimately con-
nected with the material social basis of life must always be
stressed very strongly, if it is to lead to a thorough social reform,
or even to the revolution of Society. At present it is very difficult
to estimate to what extent its efforts to educate the wealthier
classes in their social responsibilities, and the working classes in
a spirit of confidence and moderation, have actually influenced
the class-war. The importance of Christian Socialism in England
is well known. In other countries it is harder to estimate
its significance. In any case, it exists. In these matters material
circumstances speak louder than ideas; but they need to be
filled with idealistic content. In this respect Christian Socialism
certainly has a mission, although it will scarcely be able to
build up the new social order. 614a
Social Influence of Ascetic Protestantism
On the other hand, the social influence of Ascetic Protestantism
upon the history of civilization has been penetrating and com-
prehensive . 616 Through its ecclesiastical ideal, which merges into
the ideal of the Free Churches, the democratic constitution of
its individual congregations, as well as of its general ecclesiastical
structure, its autonomous individualism, based upon the Will
of God and the fact of Redemption, and its systematic and
positive industry, it has become one of the basic causes of the
immense changes in modern Society; this spirit has only been
brought into Catholic and Lutheran countries from outside ; but
it would never have been created solely by the new economic,
political, and technical conditions of the modern world. This fact
must be regarded as one result of this inquiry. At this point it
is impossible to make a balanced estimate of the influence exerted
by the forces which have moulded modern society ; it is sufficient
to point out that Ascetic Protestantism has made an important
contribution to the whole. Of course, we might express the
ai4a Cf. Sombart: Sozialismus und soziale Bewegung , pp. ig i 100 , 252, 362.
515 See p. 989.
PROTESTANTISM
819
question differently — thus: Did this achievement only become
possible to Ascetic Protestantism, or was it even forced upon it
by its adjustment to the surrounding world of progressive Western
Europe? In the course of this inquiry this point also has been
discussed several times. The country round Geneva already con-
tained impulses of that kind ; undoubtedly France, Holland, and
England contained still more. Also the fact that, in many
countries, its members were forcibly excluded from the official
world has helped to shape it. On the whole, however, in face of
developments which agree with each other in so many entirely
different forms of civilization, and sometimes in such unfavour-
able surroundings, it is surely permissible to emphasize here the
primary significance of the religious and ethical idea, which,
indeed, from the very outset bore within itself a great power
of adaptation to practical and average needs. B15a To-day, how-
ever, its spirit, has very largely vanished from that which it
essentially helped to create. Its creations have passed into other
hands, and are being shaped by them according to their purposes.
This is particularly true of the transformation of the results of
the English Puritan Revolution by the French Revolution, and
its intellectual and literary impulses. Against this “Enlighten-
ment 55 , however, created by the Latin and Catholic peoples,
which sends out its rationalistic and abstract ideas in every
direction, there contends to this day everywhere the conception
of human society and its aims which has been formed in the
school of Ascetic Protestantism. Pre-eminently its spirit is in-
carnate in the Anglo-Saxon world. So far as the social struggle of
the present day is spiritual and concerned with questions of
principle, it turns upon the question of this conflict between the
Corporation-idea of Anglo-Saxon Calvinism and the Democracy
of French Rationalism; Catholic and Lutheran Patriarchalism
have retired into the background. This general opposition tends
to modify group differences within Protestantism to an appre-
ciable extent. Calvinism and the sect-movement have found each
other. But Lutheranism also is being slowly drawn into the
forward march of the Protestant social doctrines, and is being
influenced by Ascetic Protestantism. This process of development
will increase when, as we may expect with certainty, it is no
longer supported by the State.
Protestant ecclesiasticism, which began as the Reform of
Catholicism, and which had built up a new uniform and com-
pulsory Christian civilization, was led to an ever greater extent
516a Cf. above, p. 631.
820 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
to sever its social doctrines from these early universal ecclesiastical
developments. The first great structure which arose out of this
process of separation was Ascetic Protestantism. It has founded
and evolved the main body of Protestant civilization. But its
power is weakening, and Protestantism is thus faced by new
tasks, both in its own sociological development and in its
corporate connection with civilization.
PROTESTANTISM
821
NOTES TO CHAPTER III
19 7a (P* 465 •) On this point we must mention especially the well-known
biography of Luther by Denifle , who emphasizes rightly that Luther was not
influenced by Thomism, and indeed that he only had a limited acquaintance
with this philosophy. When, however, this leads him to accuse Luther of
ignorance of the whole great system of Catholic science, saying that in his
ignorance he had stuck obstinately to a less valuable scientific form of Catholi-
cism, and.that therefore all his polemics are misdirected, we can only explain
this by concluding that this is part of the modern Catholic apologetic. In
reality, Occamism was the real reason for the break-up of the unity of Catholic
civilization and theology, whose position had become untenable, and to that
extent it constituted the natural foundation for a new interpretation and
development of Christian thought. On this point cf. W. Kohler: Ein Wort zu
Denifles Luther , 1904. The basis of Luther’s thought upon Occamism is strongly
and rightly emphasized in the extremely interesting book by Hermelink: Die
theologische Fakultdt in Tubingen, 1477-1534, 1906, in which for the first time
there is clearly set*forth the relation between Thomism and Occamism in this
important transition period (on this point cf. my review in G.G.A . , 1909).
Linsenmann: Gabriel Biel und der Nominalismus , Theol. Quartalschrift, 1865, takes
this same point of view which is so important for Lutheran thought. This
Nominalism, however, still continues the main features of mediaeval Christian
piety, in so far as it still regards the Universal Church and the Christian nature
of the whole of Society as perfectly natural assumptions ; the co-operation of the
laity, of the secular authorities, of the councils is more strongly emphasized in
this ideal, the rational metaphysical basis of theology is set aside, and its
authoritative and revelational character is increased.
ltta (p. 467.) Kautsky's position is naturally that of a man who traces the
origin of the Reformation to class movements ( Sozialismus in Einzeldarstellungen ,
/, i,pp. 239-251). To him Luther is an agitator who provides a religious sanction
for the communistic-democratic opposition, and an unprincipled courtier
who supplies a religious sanction for the rising absolutism ; his great influence
is supposed to be due to this dual position. The real hero of the Reformation
is Thomas Miinzer, who did not possess Luther’s second detestable charac-
teristic. Reasons for these statements are not given in this superficial sketch,
which is entirely lacking in understanding. A similar view is expressed by
Kalthoff: Das ^eitalter der Reformation , hg. von Steudel, 1907 , from the point of
view of the theory of the collectivist interpretation ofhistory. The editor says :
“In the economic and class struggles K. gives us an insight into the inner-
most driving forces in that whole mighty upheaval of civilization, and we thus
are able to understand the personalities which emerge from the fight between
declining and fresh groups of interests” (VIII). The author, however, makes no
attempt to carry out this programme. K. contents himself with pointing out
in a quite general way the bourgeois character of the Reformation, illustrated
chiefly by Diirer and Hans Sachs. There is certainly something true in this,
but it does certainly not mean that a class struggle was the chief cause of the
Reformation — Dilthey: Die Glaubenslehre der Reformatoren ( Preuss . Jahrbb ., 75,
1894), and Arnold Berger: Die Kidturaufgaben der Reformation , 1895 , and Luther -
biographie , I 2 , 1908 , emphasize strongly the indirect influence of the develop-
ment of the towns, the increasing influence of the laity in the Church, and the
solid virtues of the bourgeois way of life. Here, quite rightly, the Reformation
8aa THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
movement is placed within the absolutely necessary broad setting of the general
history of civilization. But, as so easily happens in such a comprehensive view,
the lines which converge in Luther become indistinct, and the definite concrete
conception of Luther’s own development also suffers. Luther is still essentially
a monk who follows the great mediaeval way of the realization and concen-
tration of the religious life, the way of monasticism, and he is also a theologian
who first of all comes to his own position through inward experience, and the
theological study of late Scholasticism, of mysticism, of St. Augustine, of St.
Bernard, and of the New Testament, and only from this does he enter into
relation with the tendencies of his time. In these books the authors also overlook
the fact that Luther starts from the conception of the Church, and gives it
a new connotation, but that he does not substitute for it a non-ecclesiastical
form of mysticism and lay religion. This means that from the very beginning
the aim is laid down which is implied in the ecclesiastical objectivity of the
Word and the Sacrament, and the further consequence of the conception of
the Church; further on this subject is treated in greater fullness. Therefore
primarily Luther is an ecclesiastical theologian, and quite distinct from
sectarian leaders, as well as from the representatives of a purely lay religion,
whose outlook is wholly individualistic. Therefore all presentations of the
subject err which do not conceive him as a Church reformer, but as a represen-
tative of the purely individualistic lay religion which many modern people of
the present day prefer, and who, therefore, place Luther in an exaggerated
historical succession of late mediaeval lay religion and bourgeois thought,
instead of in the direct line of theological tradition. We have to be surer of the
facts of the influence of the former element in his pre-monastic period; this
can only be discovered through the medium of the study of late Scholasticism,
mysticism, and Humanism, which in any case did contain new sociological
points of view; this, however, in view of the nature of the subject, would be a
very difficult task. — The relation between his doctrine, which had already
been formulated in its main features, and the Lutheran propaganda, to the
social tendencies of the time is now illuminated in the important work by
Barge: Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt , 77 , 1903. According to this work Luther’s
own doctrine in its final form is everywhere on the side of government, and
its interest in order, which desires the reform of the Church, the breaking
of the power of the hierarchy, a policy of secularization, and a morally
authoritative control of the excited masses of the population; Luther himself
is only interested in social reform within these limits, after the first great ideal
hopes of the Reformation had failed, which he had expressed in his treatise
To the Nobility of the German Nation , and after the failure of the nobility to meet
his hopes caused him to turn to the idea of small groups of genuine Christians
with a Christian Kastenordnung ; the cause of this failure was due to actual
conditions. To Luther social reform was always only a secondary question ; in
fact it only interested him in so far as it provided a better basis for the religious
life. The fact is that Luther’s interests were purely religious, and that otherwise
his was an entirely conservative nature. At the same time the social revolutionary
endeavours of the peasants and of the proletariat of the great towns were
taking place, whose religious elements were more Hussite or Taborite in
character, and although they were drawn into the agitation caused by the
Lutheran movement, they were neither spiritually nor theologically deter-
mined by it. Finally also there was a third group of reform movements
which Barge especially mentions; it was composed mainly of small artisans
with whom the clergy and schoolmasters were in sympathy; this group was
PROTESTANTISM
823
strongly anti-clerical, and wished to see a free lay Christianity of the Con-
gregational type which would entirely do away with Catholic ritual, theologi-
cally would get rid of the authority of the Church and an official ministry,
and which wished to introduce all kinds of social and ethical reforms under
the wing of the State and of the administration of justice, in the sense of a
severer form of the Christian way of life and charitable activity, and also
elementary Christian social reform in Society in general ; all this, however, is
not to take place through the territorial princes, but through the local authori-
ties and the parish representatives; the latter groups accept radical anti-
sacramental theology, and provide the soil for the Baptists, since everywhere
the territorial lords or the stronger neighbouring powers suppress all communal
independence of that kind. Here also there is an entire lack of any clear idea
of a comprehensive and uniform reshaping of the Church, like that which was
developed by Calvinism, at a later date, with similar ideas. These ideas are
simply local and temporary in character, based on the expectation that in
some way or another the order of the whole Church will come into being.
As naturally this order did not arise, these aspirations provided a fertile soil
for the development of Separatist communities or of the Baptists. Thus, from
this side also we see that it is quite impossible to describe the Reformation
doctrine as deterfnined by the outlook of one particular class and its develop-
ment. As Barge several times points out, a very great part was played, on the
other hand, by the aversion to the Catholic Church and the independent spirit
of the laity which had developed during the later mediaeval times ; this latter
movement was, of course, deeply rooted not merely in an opposition in ideals
but in real social facts. We also ought not to underestimate the importance
of Bible study by the masses in a time which was so penetrated with religious
ideas. The enormous controversial literature, with its extremely detailed
Biblical exposition which is quite unintelligible to us modern men, can only
be understood from the standpoint of an independent religious interest in the
attempt to square life and doctrine with the standard of the Bible. Further,
we have to take into account the fact of a sediment of demagogy— the kind of
thing which always forms part of universal agitations of this kind— which
gives rise to the most varied and wild meaningless and chaotic extravagances. —
I have just given an outline of the most important ideas in Barge's book, but at
the same time I have made clear the points in which I disagree with him.
“Lay Christian Puritanism”, whose apostle, Karlstadt, he describes in a
strongly partisan spirit (cf. Karl Muller: Luther und Karlstadt , igoy), is neither
the logical result of Lutheran thought, nor is it a hopeful programme for
German conditions ; the reason for this will emerge in the analysis of Calvinism.
200 (p. 469.) Well formulated in Preuss: Die Entwickelung des Schriftprinzips
bei Luther bis zur Leipziger Disputation , igoi , p. 34; it was the Scholastic doctrine
that “the sacraments of the New Covenant opere operato are channels of grace
of a purely positive, as well as ethical and religious power. All that is required
is that the recipient should place no barrier. This corresponded entirely to the
whole mediaeval fundamental idea which conceived the relation between God
and man as something, properly speaking, quite concrete, as an exchange of
mutual activity, as a relationship of service and reward. This point of view
(which Luther also shared at the beginning, but which was so little able to
satisfy him that it almost drove him to despair) was for him, after that funda-
mental experience, in principle overcome; in place of the old relationship
there now emerged a relationship which is interpreted as one based upon God’s
grace, as an entirely personal turning of God towards the sinner, and of the
824 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
faith of man, that is: his personal confidence in God, his purely personal
relationship.” The vital point is this : that Luther could find no peace in the
Catholic sacraments, and that in his preparation for the Sacrament all he
could feel was conviction of sin, the oppression of the law, and self-righteousness.
This explains his different religious feeling, and it is from this standpoint that
he appeals to the Pauline assurance of grace in Christ. Bohmer ( Luther im Licht
der Neueren Forschung , 1906), who accuses me of a misunderstanding by making
the doctrine of the Sacrament the starting-point of Luther’s theory when it
should be regarded as an important result, says the same thing : “Grace is no
longer conceived by him as a supernatural energy or medicine which is
imparted to men through the sacraments, and which then ought 0 to bring
forth spiritual and moral results, but an attitude of God which is proclaimed
in the Word of God and works through the means of the Word just as otherwise
the manifestation of a spirit is manifested through a word” {p. 77). That is
exactly my own meaning, and all that Bohmer says about me is due to a
misunderstanding. Entirely in agreement with my own point of view is
Gottschick's definition, Die Lehre der Ref. v. d. Taufe , 1906, p. 13.
* 01 (p. 469.) On this point and that which follows, cf. my presentation of the
subject in the Kultur der Gegenwart, /, IV, 1: Protestantisches Christentum und Kirche.
In it also the literature upon which my views are based is given in full. In the
second edition of 1909 I accepted the objections which had been raised.
Essentially in the positive conception they made no difference ; they were only
concerned with my habit of contrasting the thought-world of the Reformation
with the modern thought- world. That, however, is a point of view which
Protestantism as a whole must adopt, because it is only so that we can under-
stand the crisis through which it is passing at the present day. For the present
work this point of view disappears. Here we are solely concerned with the
special subject of the confessional Protestant social doctrines, compared with
the Latin Catholic and the early Christian social teaching. Here, however,
also it will become clear that fundamental assumptions have been maintained
which only Latin Catholicism had gained ; indeed, from the sociological and
ethical side the continuity is much clearer than from the side of pure dogma,
which is the aspect with which theologians are usually entirely concerned.
Since, namely, the exclusive dominion of religious authority and the stable
constitution of secular society in accordance with that as well as of the secular
thought of the Middle Ages and of early Protestantism are common to both,
and since the whole system in both cases is based upon this exclusiveness of
authority and stability, and since, further, this exclusiveness and stability on
the spiritual and secular side of an established Christian civilization and society
both theoretically and actually is the work of the Middle Ages, this then forms
the presupposition of Protestantism and this thought goes on working out in
Protestantism. The deep differences are naturally not to be overlooked, but
they move within a common framework. And it is precisely this common
framework which the modern world had broken ; indeed, that is the element
which quite clearly is to be fixed in it alone as its character; cf. my discussion,
Das Wesen des Modernen Geistes , Preuss. Jahrbb ., 1907. With the breaking down
of this framework, however, then only will the motives of Protestantism which
are related to the modern world become free and find a development which
leads far away from the meaning and spirit of the Reformers in whose minds
that framework was most closely connected with the subject itself ; see my
article, Luther und die Moderne Welt in das Christentum , Leipzig, 1907,
104 (p. 473.) This variation between direct Divine appointment and indirect
PROTESTANTISM
825
causation through Natural Law is characteristic of the strongly religious-
positivist attitude of Lutheran thought. Both, however, are combined in the
idea that in one way or another God alone is the Author of all these things,
and that particular institutions are only direct manifestations of the otherwise
indirect Law of Nature which mediates the Divine Will ; see Luthardt: Luthers
Ethiky 1867 , pp . 94 ff.: “The natural ordinances and classes . . . belong only
to this temporal and natural life. But although they are only secular classes,
and are subordinate to reason, that does not imply that they are profane, but
they are instituted, ordained, and willed by God, and God is present within
them. For God uses His creatures like a ‘mask* behind which He Himself is
concealed and behind this ‘veil* He does all things. . . . The view of the
active presence of God in all His creatures and ordinances he has always
maintained. If, however, these secular classes are the will and ordinance of
God, and if He is present within them, then also there must be a relation
between them and the Gospel. For they are both of God even though they are
different — on the one hand, they are the ordinance of God the Creator and
now of God the Redeemer.” Here we must point out that it is at this point
that the conservative conception of Natural Law and Natural Right arises
within Lutheranism ; cf. Eugen Ehrhardt: La Notion du Droit Naturel chez Luther
(. Festschrift von Pans fur Montauban , 1901 , pp. 287-320).
207 (P* 47^0 The sects also had already discarded the idea of an ascent
from Nature to Super-Nature as has been shown already. But also the late
Scholasticism of the Occamists with its restored emphasis upon the absolute
opposition between Grace and Nature had also discarded this conception
together with the ideas of reconciliation and development which it involved ;
see Hermelink: Die theologische Fakultat in Tubingen , i9o6 y pp. 111 and 122. For the
Primitive State this difference has already been set aside, since it is argued
that there was no ascent from connatural perfection to supernatural perfection,
but perfection in itself is conceived as a debitum naturae , and on account of
the weakness of man only needs to be filled with supernatural grace ; see Linsen -
mann: a.a. 0 . y pp. 648-651. We may, however, say that Luther’s discarding of
those conceptions was so far original to the extent in which its motive was not
the radicalism of the opposition but the idea of the essential connection between
Grace and Nature within the Will of God. It is here that there arises the
peculiar limitation in contrast with Catholicism that the Lutheran relationship
between Grace and Nature makes possible on the one hand an inner combina-
tion, an immanence of Grace in Nature, but that on the other hand, since
Nature is appointed merely by an act of will as the sphere for the exercise of
Grace, all inner union and reconciliation between the two disappears and
genuine Protestantism finds it much more difficult to have an inner relation
with “Nature”. The Catholic assertion that Protestantism has much less
inward connection with Nature and with civilization is to that extent right,
and is based upon this fact, a circumstance which is usually not noticed by
Protestant controversialists.
208 (p. 482.) Rudolf Sohm has illustrated his well-known thesis that Church
and Law are absolutely inconsistent particularly by Luther, to whom he
ascribes the complete removal of every element of law out of the conception
of the Church : “Luther declared war on every kind of Church law, every kind
of Divine Church law, and in principle likewise on all Church order which
is merely human, historical, and therefore changeable, which gives itself out
to be such of whatever kind it be” ( Kirchenrecht , 7 , 1892 , p. 461). I cannot
consider this statement accurate in this form. Luther certainly spiritualized
826 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
to the utmost the conception of the Church and of religion, and he knew
neither a quantitative doctrinal belief, but only a spirit which tended towards
the Gospel as a whole, nor a compulsory orthodoxy, but only religious instruc-
tion alongside of the suppression of heretical expressions as a disturbing
rebellion against the Christian order of Society. But since his spiritualized con-
ception of the Church still has its outward tangibility through supernatural
concrete signs in the pure Word which is to be kept pure, as also in the Sacra-
ment which is to be rightly taught and administered, so, then, there arises out
of this the necessity of creating an apparatus of legal protection and of legally
regulated administration for them. Luther only does not attempt this as long
as he leans wholly upon the idea of the miraculous power of the Word which
will naturally effect everything by its own power, and as long as the old
ecclesiastical order continues. Later, however, this super-idealism was dis-
illusioned. In the period of fermentation and of varied local attempts at reform
Luther allowed the congregations to try to create their own new order of
administration and he gave this his sanction. When, however, nothing came
of this and the Peasants’ War brought in its train a dangerous abuse of these
reforms, he desired a general new order for the sake of the country, and then
in the new Territorial Church Luther had to tolerate a human apparatus of
law for the assistance of the Word, and incidentally he even' had to encourage
it, for which the early beginnings lay in the purity of the doctrine and the
sacraments and the necessity for an ordered ministry. Out of these relics of a
visible and concrete Church there arose once more, as at one time out of the
visibility of the episcopal office, necessarily a law. Here also this does not
mean that Luther has denied his earlier position, but the reappearance of the
consequence of the Church conception which at first had been severely checked ;
this Church conception implied a supernatural and therefore universal institu-
tion, which in certain definite aspects also needed to be outwardly tangible,
with a permanent external constitution. If by a Church a supernatural
institution is meant which is visible in revelation and in sacrament, this then
produces also out of these supernatural elements a supernaturally established
law, whether the basis of this law and its creation is left to the congregations
themselves or handed over to the civil authority; inferences will always be
drawn out of a basis of (supernatural) fellowship which demands the formation
of law. Even though its carrying out may be entrusted to circumstances,
regarded as purely human and liable to be changed at will, the law itself may
change, but the demand for its formation remains. Only a conception of the
Church, which has resolved itself into a purity of doctrine and sacraments
which can dispense with the visible (which is a purely religious general spirit
and a purely inner fellowship), can dispense with law. But then this would not
be a conception of the Church at all, and it was not Luther’s conception of
the Church. That idea is purely the conception of religion as something vital
which cannot be touched or defined, and its opposition to law is no longer
the opposition between Church and law, but between religion and law, which
certainly is a fundamental and real difference. This points, however, to a
tension between religion and the Church itself which shows that in reality
the two are not identical. Out of this tension there always arises the emancipa-
tion of religion from the objectivity of the institution and of the supernatural
authority, and the turning towards an unlimited inwardness of mysticism and
of spirituality, as, indeed, the mystics and Spiritual Reformers of the Reforma-
tion period have done, believing that they were developing to their logical
conclusion the ideas of the Reformers. Cf. my discussion. Religion und Kirche ,
PROTESTANTISM
827
Preuss. Jahrbb ., 1895. The Church conception of Sohm fluctuated between that
of a universal and supernatural institution and that of a purely spiritual and
intellectual connection which consists solely in the wealth of its subjective
personal effects. That, however, is a Church conception adapted to modern
requirements. Here I must agree with Hofling’s and Ritschl’s conception,
which Sohm borrows ( p . 467). The passages from Luther on the contrary,
which Sohm quotes, do not seem to me to prove his thesis, but only to show
that Luther found it very difficult to combine the spirituality, voluntary
nature, and inwardness of his idea of a religious community with the necessity
of law which was required by the need of a pure message and an ordered
ministry — that law remains to Luther always something human which only
has to be tolerated, but that in its necessary issuing forth from the Word and
the Sacrament in itself still is always, at least at the starting-point, a jus divinum .
Thence also the development of the conception of the ministry in Lutheranism
and of the constitution of elders in Calvinism. Here certainly there are incon-
sistencies, but they are involved in a conception of the Church which asserts
at the same time that it is visible and invisible, voluntary and universal.
These inconsistencies belong to the conception of the Church itself; they are
not due to the cofnbination of law with the conception of the Church. There
will be more about this in the next section.
210 (P- 484.) For Luther’s conception of the Church, which from the very
outset was closely connected with the new idea of salvation, its independence
of Huss, and its inner difference from the Hussite teaching, v. the excellent
discussion by Gottschick: Huss , Luthers und Zwinglis Lehre von der Kirche , Z- f
Kirchengeschichte , VIII, 1886. In contrast with the Hussite idea of a fellowship
of the elect, which works itself out through the institution of the Church, but
which makes the divinity of the ecclesiastical institutions and of the priests
dependent upon agreement with the ethical law of Christ and thus approaches
the Donatist sectarian idea in spite of the assertion of the Catholic nature of
the sacraments, with complete exclusion of all sectarian making the Church
dependent upon the realization of the law of Christ, it is the institution
of grace, or of the Word which by baptism includes all, but which only rules
all by the word of grace. Therefore here also his emphasis on Scripture is
different. P. 377: “Huss’s Scriptural principle differs from that of the Reformers
in this respect — for the Reformers the standard of ideas which forms the main
content of the Scriptures, and which they, through the authority of the same,
maintain against the authoritative demands of the Catholic ecclesiastical legal
institution, is the Gospel of the free grace of God in Christ which grants
forgiveness apart from all human merit ; for Huss, however, it is the Gospel
law.” — The presupposition of all this is Infant Baptism and its general exten-
sion. Both Luther and the population in general which believed in the unity
of the Christian Society regarded this as obvious ; when in the Visitations
Luther came across people who had not been baptized, baptism was adminis-
tered immediately without anyone thinking that this was a compulsory religious
observance. Cf. Barge: Karlstadt , //, p. 142. Luther never doubted the validity of
Infant Baptism, and that means he never doubted the necessity for its universal
administration, as Karl Muller rightly maintains against Barge ; all he had to
do was to make his idea of the nature of the baptismal process to agree with
his general idea of the process of salvation, which he effected by his theory of
a slumbering faith effected in the children. Cf. Karl Muller: Luther und Karlstadt ,
217-221. Thus Luther’s Church conception can never be understood merely
out of his opposition to the Catholic Church, but also out of his opposition to
8 a 8 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the sects, and here Infant Baptism and its universal character form the decisive
element. Then there must be added alongside of this opposition to the Catholic
conception of the Church the setting aside of the jus divinum of the hierarchy,
the destruction of the concrete conception of the Sacrament and of Grace, the
reduction of all the effect of the Church, and of redemption to a purely spiritual
effect of the Word, that is : all the important features which are implied in the
Catholic conception of the Church : its institutional character, its objectivity,
its authority over the individual, universality and its dominion over the whole
of Society, which is here, however, now conceived solely in a spiritual sense. —
For the close connection of Luther’s conception of the Church withothe idea
of Infant Baptism, in which the incorporation in the process of salvation of
the institution of the Word which is based upon faith is completed and thus
to everyone a basis is given which is independent of his own efforts; cf. Gottschick:
Die Lehre der Reformation von der Taufe , igo6. Infant Baptism is commanded and
I know of no place, even when the spiritual struggle was being most hotly
waged, when the question of baptizing or not baptizing children was ever
discussed. With that, however, the main thing has been decided : an institutional
connection which manifests itself primarily in the general use of Infant Bap-
tism. — That involves the idea of the Corpus Christianum which has been so
strongly emphasized by Rieker: Die Rechtliche Stellung der ev. Kirchen Deutschlands ,
1903 , and by J. N. Figgis: From Gerson to Grotius, within which its secular and
spiritual power are only different sides of one undivided whole. That, however,
is the mediaeval idea of the unity of Christian civilization and Society. Out of
this idea there result all the main features of Protestant social doctrine.
Bdhmer thinks that he is speaking against this thesis when he says : “Meanwhile
in one theoretical point Luther also, it seems, remained in bondage to
mediaeval thought, that is, in his view of the Church. To him, as to Catholicism,
the Church was not a free association constituted by men, but an institution
established by God whose work it is to proclaim the Word of God, to comfort
men’s hearts, and counsel their consciences. Thus have we here to do really
only with a transformation of the mediaeval idea? Not at all ; here we have only
to do with a new formulation of the general Christian view of the Church in
which once more the specifically Catholic element, namely, the opinion that
a definite external legal order is essential to the Church, has been completely
set aside. For faith in the Church as having been established by God through
which and in which the Spirit of God is active in the world, is as old as
Christianity” ( p . iso). Certainly, but the decisive point is this, that alongside
of the Church-type there is the sect-type, which is equally ancient, and it also
has its roots in the New Testament; further, that the Church-type only effected
an inner penetration of the Church and the world through Latin Catholicism
in the Corpus Christianum or in the Christian Society which implied the
duty of the Government to protect this unity by guaranteeing and protecting
the institution, and that this idea is continued by Protestantism and
therefore that the essentially Catholic element does not consist merely in
uniting the Church to an external legal order. In its continually increasing
opposition to the sect-type Protestantism conforms to the Church-type, and,
indeed, to the mediaeval Church-type with its ideal of a uniform Christian
Society ; and therefore also its social doctrines in many respects are so closely
related to those of Catholicism. Whether in that we see a limitation or an
eternal truth is a matter of theological opinion. The fact remains that in the
modern world the religious roots of the Church conception and therefore of it
itself have become very weak, and that means that its social doctrines are also
PROTESTANTISM
829
of a quite different type. — For the Lutheran conception of the Church in its
intellectual form see Kolde: Luthers Stellung zu Konzil und Kirche bis vim Wormser
Reichstagy 1876; J. Kostlin: Luthers Lehre von der Kirche , 1853; R. Seeberg: Der
Begriff der christlichen Kirche , /, 1885.
811 (p. 485.) The idea that, essentially, the Church ought as far as possible
to control Society, and at the same time to assimilate civilization, has been
very characteristically formulated by the late President of the Prussian Supreme
Church Council, H. von der GoltZy in Grundlagen der christlichen Sozialpolitiky igo8 y
p. 203: “The Church (which to him is, naturally, the same as the ‘religious
community’) appears in all three forms of social life (namely, the Family, the
State, ancl Society), but it is not exhausted by any one of them, and cannot
be supported solely by any one of these forms. As a Church (and, indeed, as a
universal united Church, which has only been broken in historically by
Catholic corruption) she asserts a right to an independent existence and
activity, apart from all the social groups of natural and earthly life. This
dominant position of the Church in the social world is based on the co-operation
of four factors : ( 1 ) On the Christian conception of revelation, which recognizes
in the historic Person of Christ not only the instrument, but also the content,
of the revelation /)f the Invisible God, and the Church as the organ of the
perfect final Word of God to men, as the supporter of the absolute religious-
moral truth (that is, the objective and absolute conception of Truth) ; (2) the
transference of the real goal of humanity into the future life, so that all that
is earthly only appears as a school for eternity, and the Church is the mediator
of the heavenly good (that is, the sole power of the Church to impart salvation) ;
(3) the union of the separated groups and classes of the world of humanity into
an international commonwealth, which ethically overcomes all social opposi-
tion (that is, the universality which is the result of the two previous factors) ;
(4) the moral quickening, and the harmonious shaping, of the whole life of
civilization, from the standpoint of religious principle, as the means of com-
bining all moral tasks into a unity (that is, the acceptance of the life of the
world which is the consequence of the claim to universality; the fact that this
secular spirit is incompatible with the New Testament, von der GoltZy like all
Churchmen, does not feel at all). Through the combination of these four
factors the Church succeeded in forming for the spiritual life of religion its own
historical body, which it made important as the highest and most complete
form of social life. The Church has its most distinctive foundation in Revelation,
its main aim is the education and union of mankind for eternity, it works
through its international organization, and in the cultivation of human life
in the realm of culture.” This characterization is expressly applied to the
Church as a whole, that is, both to Catholicism and to Protestantism ( pp . 24-30).
Only within this common framework do the differences appear between
Catholicism and Protestantism. P. 284: “This conception of the position of
the Church in the common life of humanity may, however, be interpreted in
very different ways. The Catholic Church makes its organism an independent
aim, and everywhere makes the external form as important as the spiritual
content (?). Protestantism knows that all that is ecclesiastical only has value
when it is aiming at an inwardly free, but also absolutely firm and certain,
union, and (here lies the difficulty of the Protestant conception of the Church)
of the core of the personality ( !) with God.” This logical and likewise un-
imaginative statement shows the complicated character of the Protestant
conception of the Church. It does not become any clearer in the following
attempt at a closer definition: “The Church may not treat her changeable
830 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
corporate form and doctrine, ritual and constitution as an aim, but as times
change these things must be regarded as methods which are adjusted to these
changes, in order to cultivate communion with God in the hearts of men, and
to have a purifying and hallowing influence inwardly upon the world of civiliza-
tion. And even if, in so doing, her rightful influence is threatened, she must
not cling to external supports, but she must make her services desirable, and
radiate the righteousness of God as a victorious power into the consciences of
men. Only with such a high conception of her ethical tasks, based upon the
right spirit, can the Church maintain her healthy (that is, not compulsorily
formed, and therefore joyfully supported) relation to the tasks of civilization,
and to the various groups of natural moral fellowship.’ * In these expressions
all the peculiarities of the Church conception, and all the particular difficulties
of the Protestant Church conception, are found together ; the latter consist in
the combination of inner freedom and absolute stability, of universal dominion
and spiritual propagation combined with the renunciation of all compulsory
authority, of a future and eternal goal and a harmonious permeation of
civilization, of an objective institution and a personal religion of sentiment.
Also the relation of this Church to “natural” society, which von der Goltz
constructs, is only a modern form of the Lutheran Lex J{aturae, and of the
social system which is evolved from it. Similarly, one of the most active
ecclesiastical leaders of the Conservatives, R. Seeberg , describes a “healthy
piety” as one which is both “Churchly” and friendly to civilization, that is,
“pressing into the business of life and sanctifying it” ( Die Kirchlich-Soziale Idee
und die Aufgaben der Theologie der Gegenwart , Z ur sjyst. Theol. , II, igog, p. 327).
This is required “both by the nature of man and by the history of civilization
and of religion” ( p . 328). “All forms of the natural life in the State, and in
politics, in trade and industry, in science and in art, also all the great doings
of the mighty ones of the world, and all the work of everyday men and women,
are to the Christian the workings of God, in which is prepared and realized
the coming of his Kingdom. The distinction between the State and the Church,
however important it may be in other directions, ought never to mean that
God is only active in the Church, or that God’s servants are free from the
duty of serving Him in the family, in the national life, in society, and in the
State” (p. 334 ). This means the dominion of the Church over civilization
apart from the hierarchical methods of authority, and the dominating spirit
of Catholicism. For Seeberg this is the natural meaning of Jesus, and of the
New Testament: “The redeeming dominion of God (made effective through
the Church and the ministry) is the creative and guiding principle of human
history, and it so organizes this history along lines of development completed
through mutual influence as to lead to the goal of the Kingdom of God.
Both these primitive Christian ( !) ideas determine the peculiar world-view of
Christianity” (p. 333). Therefore, to Seeberg, as also to the Catholics Mausbaeh ,
von Nostitz-Rieneck, and others, the Church is the “principle of progress”. Owing
to the fact that it is based upon absolute Divine truths, the Church is naturally,
in the main, absolutely conservative, but “the brake is also a method of progress,
since without it the carriage would roll over the nearest precipice and be
smashed to bits”. All these ideas are in reality also the leading ideas of the
Lutheran conception of the Church, only they have been translated into the
flatness of modern academic terminology, without any understanding of the
difficult problems which Luther felt these ideas contained.
111 (p. 487O For the development of the authority and sole infallibility of
the Bible, together with the establishment of this infallibility upon the practical
PROTESTANTISM
831
experience of salvation which is the sole experience of redemption in the Bible,
see Preuss: Entwickelung des Schriftprinzips bei Luther ,1901. On pp. 6, 14, and 60,
the author rightly distinguishes it from the Humanist principle of Scripture
which uses historical methods and studies the sources, thus leading it to an
estimate of the original situation, but in no way leading to a basis of religious
infallibility. He also treats very aptly the relation with mysticism which ignores
the mediation of the Church and of the Bible in its immediate intercourse with
God : Luther modifies the idea of the union of the soul with God to mean the
union of the soul with the Word, and always relates the general principle of
revelation !tnd redemption of the Logos to Christ and the Word of Christ ;
he does this to such an extent that even the glory of the Creation through the
Logos, the Christian view of Nature, is mediated through meditation on Christ
and the Word. For the relation between Luther’s free and critical treatment
of Scripture and his view of the infallibility of the Scriptures which he held
firmly at the same time, see Scheel: Luthers Stellung zur h. Schrift , 1902 . Luther,
and above all the Lutheran Church, found in the end that they could not
unite both and they gave up the former in favour of the latter. That, however,
was only the logical result of the need of ecclesiastical authority and organiza-
tion. It could not be helped, there was simply nothing else to be done. The
attempts of present-day theologians to return to Luther’s earlier theory of
Scripture, which combined criticism and authority and only used the Scriptures
as the standard for practical religious life, presuppose first the stability of
existing churches which could only have been gained by the orthodox theory
of Scripture, and, secondly, will never be able to create unity, since nowhere
at all can we draw an authoritative line. The principle of Scripture which is
bound up with the conception of the Church and of absolute truth, and a
unity in standard and doctrine, must inevitably develop into orthodox doctrine,
just as the institution of the Papacy issues in the infallible monarchical seat of
doctrinal authority, and modern orthodoxy which accepts higher criticism is
in the same position as Catholic Modernism, which tries to turn the Papacy
into a system of authority and supervision which is merely pedagogical in
character.
213 (P- 49 1 -) Eieker, who has also triumphantly vindicated the significance of
the mediaeval idea of the Corpus Christianum for Luther, has certainly found
difficulties in this “Congregational” ideal. He has tried to solve them too easily
by describing them as a mistaken bias towards the Baptist sect-type (he seems
to base these remarks on some meagre suggestions by Achelis on this question) ;
he seems to consider that this phase of Luther’s life was a tribute which he paid
to the tendencies of the time, with which he had little affinity ( Rieker,pp . 74-86;
Achelis: System der Prakt. Theol. , /, 99 ff.). Against this interpretation Walther
Kohler has reacted in a very instructive piece of research : Die Entstehung der
reformatio ecclesiarum Hassiae von 1926 ', Deutsche Z.f. Kirchenrecht , 1906, pp . 199-232,
and in an article, Z u Luthers Kir chenbe griff, Christl. Welt, 1907 , pp . 371-377 .
His view is that the previous theory is a misunderstanding and an under-
estimate of the Congregational ideal. That was followed by the penetrating
research of Drews : Entsprach das Staatskirchentum dem Ideal Luthers? 1908, who
answers this question in the negative, and who pleads that the Congregational
ideal can very well be united with the fundamental idea of the Church, but
that it was limited at that time because of the period of transition in which
it was conceived ; all that matters is the establishment of the Word, the method
employed to do this is indifferent ; since finally this could only be effected with
the aid of the territorial lord, whose assistance Luther accepted as a service of
832 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
love but not as dominion. Still more decided in his views of the connection
between the Congregational ideal and actual local conditions is Karl Midler:
Luther und Karlstadt , pp. 217-223) 123, who emphasizes the necessity for this
arrangement along with the ancient patronage system. Cf. also Hermelink:
Zu Luthers Gedanken ueber Ideal gemeinden und von Weltlicher Obrigkeit , Z-f- Kirchen -
geschichte, 1308, pp. 267-322 , where it is shown that this Congregational ideal was
connected with Apocalyptic expectations, and at the same time the anti-
democratic attitude of the congregations was represented as far as possible by
the local authority. For our subject the important point is that in all this in
any case the idea of the Church itself is preserved, in spite of an apparent
approximation to the sect-type ; see also Troeltsch: Trennung von Staat und Kirche ,
pp. 9-23. For Luther it seemed absolutely obvious that in all this the religious
form within a given territory and the territory itself should coincide (Drews,
p. 99), and all the early renunciation of any attempt at overriding men’s
consciences still only meant a temporary attitude of laissez-faire based upon
confidence in the Word ; the civil authority further had to suppress all open
blasphemy and sedition, that is, all disturbance of the unity of the Christian
Society. Of this more anon. In these expressions about the Congregational
ideal of 1522-1525, it is clear that there lies a peculiar problem which was not
merely local nor temporary, and which is of extreme interest for the sociological
significance of the Lutheran conception of the Church. It is an attempt within
the general Christian Society, and the institutional Christianity composed of
all who have been baptized, to found smaller groups in which radical Christian
piety will be realized without any intention of allowing these smaller groups
to remove the general ecclesiastical character from the Church. Kohler calls it
“a parallelism of a Christian Society which is organized and controlled by the
State and a system of smaller groups for worship and fellowship”. “When
Luther gave up the attempt to carry out this idea it was taken over by the
Anabaptists, thence it was taken over by Bucer and finally from him by
Calvin” (Christl. Welt, p. 470). The chief point, however, is this: that in so
doing the Anabaptists cut themselves off from the wider circle of the Christian
society which was being ruled : they used baptism only as adult baptism for
mature Christians and they placed the fellowship composed of those who
had been baptized in that way, in open opposition to the secularized morality
of the so-called Christendom and the Church. Calvinism, on the contrary,
transformed “the smaller groups” into the whole Church, and gave them the
structure of a universal Church within which care is taken to develop the
personal Christian piety of all the citizens and Church members. The Baptists
discard the idea of the Church altogether ; Calvinism transforms the ideal of
these smaller groups into an institutional Church which agrees with the
territory in which it is placed. In those expressions during the first half of the
twenties (in the sixteenth century) Luther is obviously seeking a middle way.
Since, however, from the outset the idea of the Church is absolutely pre-
dominant, it is not surprising that once a definite order had been established
he developed the logical implications of the idea of the Church to their fullest
extent, and gave up both the formation of smaller groups and also the idea of
transferring the administration of Church-order only to the parishes. He was
prevented from developing this idea in the Calvinistic sense both by circum-
stances and by his ecclesiastical idea of grace which was opposed to all legalism,
while Calvinism in reality replaced the idea of the Church with a sectarian
element of compulsion. This subject will be treated in greater detail in the
section devoted to Calvinism.
PROTESTANTISM
633
114 (p. 492.) The idea of a Society inspired by a uniform world-view is
undoubtedly mediaeval, but it is still a vital problem which has not yet been
solved. There cannot be a real social coherence at all without the unity of the
world-view, and it is good for us to remember that in contrast to the modern
anarchy in the view of the world which has such a disintegrating influence
upon Society and religious thought, two so very different thinkers as the
Romantic Novalis and the sober Empiricist Auguste Comte deliberately look
back to the Middle Ages as the classic epoch of a social unity based upon
unity of ideas. At the present day we have an example of the same thing in
social democracy. Also the conservative parties and the Churchmen of to-day
use the same principle, even though somewhat weakened ; see Loofs: Luthers
Stellung zu M. A. und JVeuzeit , iqoj , p. ig: “On the other hand, the gulf between
Luther and the modern day has not been fixed so irrevocably as Trocltsch
believes. Had we not ourselves until 1874 practically compulsory baptism?
Is it not a fact that blasphemy is still an offence punishable by law? And have
we not still to-day a civilization of authority of a Christian tinge which upon
the whole has compulsory religious instruction? . . . Actually the idea of what
constitutes blasphemy is interpreted very differently from the ideas of Luther,
but from the formal point of view the difference is not so great.* * That is
undoubtedly true, especially for Prussia, but it is still only a proof that the
same motives are here at work as there were in the mediaeval social order, and
that the Protestant compulsory civilization is to be interpreted in exactly the
same sense as the mediaeval. Luther’s retention of the unity of the religious
idea has certainly not merely the significance of a mediaeval prejudice, but it
is a result of a unified conception of Society and of an absolute revealed
knowledge of truth which is entirely logical. When, however, this goal had
been set up, methods were also desired in order to reach it, and the same
process will be continually repeated.
215 (p. 494 ) Here also Luther’s statements are contradictory according to
the time when they were uttered, and the situation and the collection and
interpretation of these statements vary greatly ; it all depends upon the object
which they are meant to serve ; they may be used for apologetic or for con-
troversy, for history or for doctrine. Wappler has published from the records
of Zwickau a whole series of the records of religious trials, enactments of the
Government, professional decisions of the Wittenberg theologians and jurists,
which reveal the pressure on conscience exercised by the Visitation in a most
terrible and petty manner ; see Wappler: Inquisition und Ketzerprozesse in Zwickau
zur Reformationzeit , igo8. He has combined with this a presentation of state-
ments of Luther and Melancthon which emphasize very clearly the contrast
between the earlier attitude of toleration and non-intervention on the part
of the civil authority in the free spiritual struggle, with the later exhortation
to punish all rioting and disturbance of the peace with banishment in order to
preserve the external order of Society, and at the same time the Christian social
order, until it was so far developed as to regard every heretical doctrine as the
disturber of peace and unity to be punished with extreme severity, even to the
point of death. When, however, he tests the Reformers by the modern idea of
toleration which places ethics in the forefront and doctrine in a less important
position, and then interprets their departure from this ideal because of their
appeals to the Old Testament as the fruit of the sinister Old Testament spirit
of revenge, he forgets in the first place that the Reformers Just like the mediaeval
thinkers, had the same conception of absolute truth to whom the modern
idea of toleration, with the possibility of various forms of truth (all having a
vol. n. BB
834 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
right to their individual existence alongside of one another), would have
seemed like frivolous scepticism and blasphemy: he also overlooks the fact
that the Old Testament is here called in in order to find a Scriptural basis
for things which could not be justified from the New Testament, and
which yet, because they were inevitable in practice, had to find a basis
somewhere. Further examples in horrifying fullness are given by Barge's
Karlstadt in spite of the modifications made by Karl Muller . From the Catholic
standpoint N. Paulus: Luther und die Gewissensfreiheit y 1905, collects passages
on the same subject. He explains the earlier demand for toleration as the
toleration of a minority, that is, as a demand addressed to the Roman Catholic
princes not to interfere with spiritual matters and not to hinder the Gospel,
and he shows how at the same time Luther regarded the abolition of the Mass
by the authority which was sympathetic towards the Reformation as a duty
of a Christian Government. He also argues that freedom of discussion was
only allowed to the Anabaptists and fanatics so long as he believed he could
easily cope with them, but that so soon as real opposition developed this
toleration ceased at once and was replaced by the severest suppression. In
general this is certainly in both directions not far from the truth ; but it leaves
out of account the inner motive which caused Luther to act, not merely out
of opportunism, but out of the necessity of his conception of the Church;
this at first led him to lay stress on the purely inward spiritual building up of
the communities, and a purely spiritual way of overcoming opposition in
confidence in the invincibility of the pure Word. On p. 27 there is an interesting
quotation in which Luther replies thus to the argument that the Emperor
was really in sympathy with his doctrine, and, therefore, that he would not
take it amiss if he enforced it compulsorily : “We know that he is not certain
of that matter, and that he cannot be certain because we know that he errs
and strives against the Gospel : the Emperor is under the obligation to know
God’s Word and like us to further it with all his power.” This is the real heart
of the matter, as most of the other students realize by quoting this same passage,
and it is intelligible that from such a fundamental conviction, amid so much
obstinate opposition, Luther came to feel finally that force might be used,
and, indeed, must be used in defence of the truth, both in the interest of the
defenceless, the weak, and those who are easily led astray, as well as in the
interest of the Christian unity of the Church and of Society. Paulus rightly
censures the statement of the modern orthodox Lutheran apologist W. Walther :
“Every impartial man must feel that Luther did the only right thing when he
tried to arrange that in each country there should be only one Confession”
( p . 13). There is no need to point to the Imperial law against heretics, to the
social and political danger which was caused by the existence of the Anabap-
tists, to the pressure of the surrounding Catholic States (as the learned pastor,
Bossert, with a great sense of superiority to Wappler , brings out) in order to
excuse the Reformers who ought to be judged in a relative manner ( Theol .
Litztg-> 1908, p- 153)- The new law against heresy, the demand for censorship,
and the unity of the Confessions, is ultimately due to the Reformers’ conception
of truth and of the Church, and the inconsistencies are inconsistencies which
belong to the nature of this conception of the Church, which desires a universal
Christian Church and social order, and yet at the same time to have an inward
and spiritual influence. This proved impossible in practice : so force was tried,
and these duties were entrusted to the civil authority as duties which belonged
to the exercise of Christian love and were based upon Natural Law, which
limited the purely spiritual character of ecclesiastical self-propagation to one of
PROTESTANTISM
835
theological exhortation, which preceded the government condemnation- verdict,
and to the toleration of a mistaken faith which is maintained in secret and
makes no public expression of opinion. This is in reality the ancient Catholic
law against heresy, as Paulus says, only “with this essential difference that
Melancthon grants to the civil authority as the most important member of
the Church the real decision in matters of faith, whereas on the Catholic side
the decision of religious doctrine is kept in the hands of the infallible Church.
Melancthon, indeed, also desired that in doubtful cases the princes would
allow themselves to be guided by the council of the theologians ; but in the
last resort tfic civil authority always made the final decision” ( p . 43). In that
there is expressed the retention of the spiritual methods of working and the
characterization of heresy as tumult and a disturbance of Christian Society ;
but also this implies the continuance of the Catholic idea of the unity of
Christian Society, which for its part is a logical result of the conception of the
universality of the Church. Within the common whole the emphasis has been
shifted, and in this shifting of emphasis the spirituality of the new idea of the
Church has been asserted. This has been very rightly emphasized as the vital
point by W. Kohler: Reformation und Ketzerprozess , igoi , pp. si-26, who also shows
how difficult the Reformers found it to give up their original idea of the
omnipotent character of thought or of the Word, and how finally the trans-
ference of the heresy legislation to the secular power as the protector of the
Christian unity of Society still also required the preparation of a purely
ecclesiastical heresy legislation, upon the basis of which the secular authority
could then act. This handing over to the secular authority belongs to the
establishment of the heresy law upon the Law of Nature which Melancthon
argues (p. 29), which, gathered up in the Decalogue, prescribes the protection
of the First Table, that is, especially of the office of the ministry, which is here
sanctioned by the secular authority. The new element, however, is still there,
that the suppression does not take place in the name of the Church and through
the Church, but in the name of the Christian order of Society and through the
State, whereas the only aim of the purely ecclesiastical heresy trial is the
preservation of the purity of doctrine. The secular arm does not execute a
sentence passed by the supreme authority in the Church, but the State protects
Christian Society and itself in its own name. The effect, however, is the same. —
It is incredible that Hermelink: Der Toleranzgedanke im Ref.~Zeilalter , 1908 ,
faced with all that, can picture Luther as the herald of the modern liberty of
conscience. Even in the mediaeval system it was not Christianity, but the
neo-Platonic element mingled with it which was the father of intolerance l !
Luther is supposed to have led the Church back to depend solely upon a
spiritual and inward influence, and when the Reformers handed over the right
of the punishment of heretics and the duty of establishing a unity of faith by
compulsion, it only means that they held a conception of the State which had
not yet been purified by their new knowledge — a conception of the State, that is,
of the Renaissance, Machiavelli’s Supreme Power of the State ! ! The Baptists,
on the other hand, are said to have had nothing to do with toleration. “They
were intolerant towards the State and non-Baptist Christendom in a
dangerous manner”, with which, in Wappler , one might compare the state-
ments of the entirely passive Baptists ! ! Luther’s conception of truth in which
the “spiritual and invisible” is an established truth which God breathes into
the hearts of believers, and in which “all that fights against this ... is a bit of
the devil’s work”, is said to be a relic left over from mediaeval Neo-Platonism,
which only appears in isolated instances ! ! etc. Things could not be twisted
836 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
in a more mad and stupid way, and this kind of apologetic it is which makes so
many theological works insupportable to those who are not professional
theologians.
216 (P* 494-) O n Luther’s ethic the best book is still that by Luthardt: Die
Ethik Luthers in Ihren Grundzilgen , 1867. Here, however, all tensions and difficulties
have been smoothed away, till the whole system looks as though it were com-
pletely uniform and logical. He has found this easier to do because he does not
touch practically the whole of the social philosophy. The excellent work by
Eger: Die Anschauungen Luthers von Beruf \ 1900, is an historical work which
emphasizes quite rightly the various tensions ; he is, however, only wrong when
he deduces the tension from the after-effect of monasticism instead of from
primitive Christian Radicalism, or to the dialectic incapacity of Luther to
gain a systematic deduction of civilization and the ethic of humanity con-
ceptually and the inner difficulty of the whole matter. For the early period,
Braun: Concupiscenz, is valuable. Excellent, and also of value for Luther himself,
is Hupfeld: Die Ethik Joh. Gerhards. Ein Beitrag zum Verstandnis der Lutherischen
Ethik , 1908; here also it is precisely the subject of the social philosophy and
the analysis of the tensions and inconsistencies which is ignored. On the
contrary, these difficulties are treated with great energy, but without the
knowledge of the main conceptions which illuminate the whole subject;
Lommatzsch: Luthers Lehre von Etisch-religidsen Standpunkt aus , mit hesonderer
Beriicksichtigung seiner Theorie von Gesetz, 1879. Excellent detailed researches
are offered by Gottschick: Ethik , 1908. For my view as a whole I must refer to
my work, Grundprohleme der Ethik Z-f- Theol. und Kirche, XII, 1902.
217 (p* 495-) this point Kapp is excellent : Religion und Moral im Christentum
Luthers, 1902 ; Herrmann: Verkehr des Christen mit Gott 6 , 1908 ; Thieme: Die Sittliche
Triebkraft des Glauhens y 1899. The essence of the ethic which is determined by
religion is this, that here the religious relation itself is the absolute value and
the absolute obligation, and that therefore all moral values — whether of self-
cultivation or in the formation of a relation with one’s fellow men — are placed
at the service of this supreme aim. This is how Jesus understood the matter
as has already been shown. And thus also is it interpreted by Luther; the
repetition by Luther is a confirmation of an idea which has been developed by
Luther; see above,/). 57 (against this and agreeing with Harnack’s objections
meanwhile, Thieme: Christl. Welt , 1909, pp. 77/ ff.; Bedeutung der Nachstenliebe bei
Jesus). From this point of view the first duty is that of self-conquest and self-
surrender to God, and the next duty is love to one’s neighbour for the sake of
God, with the intention of being united with one’s neighbour in God. That
both these ideas are the meaning of the Lutheran doctrine of the love of God
and the love of man, see the apt proofs in W. W alther: Die Christliche Sittlichkeit
nach Luther, 1909, p. 99, and in Thieme: Triebkraft, pp. 17-53. Let me quote a
few passages from Luther according to Thieme: “Ingressus in Christum est
fides, egressus autem est caritas, quae nos justitia Dei indutos distribuit in
obsequia proximi et exercitium proprii corporis ad succurendum alienae
paupertati, ut et ipsi per nos attracti nobiscum ingrediantur in Christum”
(p. 289) ; or the well-known and important passage : “Out of all this we come
to the conclusion that a Christian man lives not in himself, but in Christ and
his neighbour : in Christ through faith, in his neighbour through love. Through
iaith he goes out of himself into God, from God he again descends through love
and yet remains always in God and in the divine love” (p. 284) ; or : “When a
Christian begins to know Christ as his Lord and Saviour through Whom he is
redeemed from death and brought into His glory and honour, his heart becomes
PROTESTANTISM
837
so full of God that he would like to help everyone to enter into the same joy.
For he has no higher joy than to rejoice that he knows Christ (that is, the real
ethical fulfilment of personality). Therefore the Christian goes forth from
himself, teaches and exhorts other men, exalts and confesses Christ before
everyone, pleads and sighs that they might also come to such an experience of
the grace of God. That is a kind of divine unrest in the midst of the highest
repose, repose in God’s grace and peace which will not allow a man to be
idle, but urges him ever to aspire and wrestle with all his powers, to live only
to exalt the honour and praise of God amongst men that others also may
receive such a spirit of grace” ( p . 297). That is the ethic of the Gospel expressed
in somewhat different language as it has been expressed also by Augustine
and Bernard in their language as love to God and love to creatures in God.
Thieme asks the question, somewhat scholastically, whether in all this there
is not a love of one’s neighbour for his own sake, and answers it rightly by
saying that it is precisely the highest welfare of the neighbour which is served
when through showing him the love of God the love of God itself and that
happiness is kindled within the neighbour himself. This idea lies virtually and
unconsciously at the basis of the passages where all that is mentioned is help
and assistance to Qne’s neighbour. This is certainly right, and it explains why
in the ethic of Luther as in that of Jesus the social conditions of ordinary life
are of no ethical value in themselves, but they are only regarded as methods
and opportunities to develop such values out of the religious temper.
218 (P- 496.) The following quotation illustrates the logical results of these
ideas : “Now behold, these people do not need any sword or law of this world.
And if all the world were true Christians, that is, true believers, then no
prince, king, lord, sword, or law would be necessary” ( Lommatzsch , 2oy).
Renunciation of one’s own honour ( Lommatzsch , 240) , at the same time
with the admission that “only a few and very highly spiritual men” are capable
of such praise. It would be a very good thing if some scholar would give us
a study of Luther’s relation to the Sermon on the Mount. The aloofness from
the world which is expressed in the Gospel in eschatological terms, but which
in Luther primarily has a mystical basis, finds its classic expression in the
famous treatise on the Freiheit eines Christenmenschen. The chief passages of the
German text ( Berliner Ausgabe , I 1 ) : “Here then we will answer those who are
angereef by the aforesaid speeches, and who often say : ‘Oh, then, if faith is
everything and is enough to make us religious, why then are good works
required? Let us make merry and do nothing.’ No, my dear fellow, thou must
not act thus, that were only possible if thou wert an entirely inward and
spiritual man, but that will not happen till the Last Day. . . . Although man
in his soul is sufficiently justified by faith, and has all that he ought to have,
excepting that the same faith must increase into that life, yet he still remains
in this bodily life upon earth, and must rule his own body, and mix with men.
This is where works begin : here he must not be idle, the body must be exercised
with fasting and prayer, with toil and labour, and with all moderate discipline,
that it may become obedient, and conform to the inward man, and to faith,
and not hinder and resist it as is its manner where it is not forced” ( p . 306).
“Thence, each man must learn how to chastise the body in all modesty; for he
fasts, watches, labours, as long as he sees that the body needs to be kept down
by the will . . .” ( p . 507). “As Adam in Paradise, in order not to be idle, was
told to labour, so a believing man also needs to labour, — not in order to make
him a religious man, but that he be not idle, he is commanded to prepare
and preserve his body to do such good works solely in order to please God”. . .
838 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
(p. 308). This must be said of works in general and of those which a Christian
man must exercise in order to subdue his own body. Now will we speak more
of the works which he does to other men. For man does not live simply in his
own body, but among other men upon earth. Therefore he cannot live apart
from other men ; he must speak with them, and have to do with them, although
these same works are not necessary to salvation. Therefore in all his works
his intention should be freely directed to serving, and being useful to other
people, and to undertaking nothing save that which is of use to other people
(p. 312 ). “However much the work of Christ was needed and has served to
produce piety or salvation, so also are His other works, and the works of
Christians, needed by them for salvation, since they are all services rendered
freely for the good of others. ... In like manner St. Paul, in Romans xiii
and Titus iii, exhorts Christians that they should be subject to the authority
of this world, not that this will make them religious, but in order that in so
doing they may freely serve others, and the Government, by doing their will
in love and freedom.” Thus it is also possible for love’s sake to submit to
unchristian institutions and laws (p. 314). That the latter, from the point of
view of such an ethic of love, has its difficulties, and requires actions which are
inconsistent with this ideal, Luther was quite aware ( Lemmatzsch , p. 287) ;
in any case, however, this motivation means a complete indifference to the
actual political, legal, and economic values of the world. — It cannot be denied
that these ideas can be traced to St. Augustine (see Hunzinger: Luthers tudien, /,
1906) and to German and Bernardine mysticism {Braun: Bedeutung der Con -
cupiszenz ). The most important thing, however, is to realize clearly that this
is only the transformation of the radicalism of the Sermon on the Mount
which became the prevalent point of view after the time of Augustine, the
mystically based and interpreted exposition of the commands of absolute
self-sanctification for God, and of absolute brotherly love, with the complete
disappearance of the secular virtues of conflict and justice. The command to
renounce rights and worldly honours, and completely to surrender the spirit
to God has become the command of humility and of the love of self only in
God, and the command of brotherly love as the manifestation of the love of
God, has become the mystical love of the brethren in God, with the mortifica-
tion of all selfishness. The conversio ad Deum means turning towards the only
true Being, and the union of brethren in this one Reality; the substitution of
the radical ethic of love for the merely relative virtues, gained in the struggle
for existence, has become a turning away from the untrue and the unreal
non-being of the world which leads to selfishness and multiplicity. In this
interpretation, however, Luther follows throughout the primitive Christian
Radicalism — indeed, he went into the cloister for that reason, for in the
monastery alone, however much altered, the radical ethic had been main-
tained. Thence he only came through gradually to a new development of this
Radicalism, which carried it into the everyday life of every individual, without
externally removing it ; in connection with this also the mystical interpretation
went back more and more to the real meaning of the Sermon on the Mount.
919 (P* 497-) It is undeniable that Luther’s Gemeindeideal — that is, the regula-
tion of the calling of pastors and the control of the behaviour of parishioners
(which starts from the individual) — is connected with an interpretation of the
Christian ethic in the sense of the communism of love and a strict observance
of the Christian rules of life ; the Leisnig Ordinance lays stress upon the latter
element, and the little pamphlets entitled Dass eine christl. Gemeinde Recht habe
alle Lekre zu urteilen und Lehrer zu beru/en, and Von der Ordnung des Gottesdienstes
PROTESTANTISM
839
in der Gemeinde, emphasize the former; both, however, have the same aim.
In the preface to the former Luther approves “that you have undertaken to
make a new order of public worship and to hold goods in common according
to the example of the Apostles (that is, of the Primitive Church)”. B.A. , IV, /,
p . in; in the Ordinance itself it is said : “We have received a thorough know-
ledge that all the inner and outer possessions of Christian believers should
serve and be used for the glory of God and for the love of one’s neighbour, for
one’s fellow Christians according to the ordering of Divine truth and not
according to human ideas” ( p . 117) ; at the same time the congregation has
provided for a strict Church discipline ( pp . u8ff.). This is undoubtedly an
approximation to the sect-type ; we must, however, remember that W. Kohler
not only rightly points out that this is the source of the Baptist and Calvinist
ideals, but also that other very important things were involved in both of these.
Calvin especially is less concerned with the exercise of the priesthood of
all believers than with the founding of a holy community ordered by God ;
cf. below. Luther is also clear that a community of those who “earnestly wish
to be Christians and confess the Gospel with hand and mouth” (p. 168) cannot
be a Church of the masses, at least not at first. Therefore, in the famous intro-
duction to the Masse deutsch , there is the idea of a more select body of com-
municants within the external Church who attend the preaching service
and undergo Christian instruction, thus distinguishing between “an ordered
and certain gathering within which one could rule Christians according to
the Gospel”, and the great parish where is “only public stimulus to faith and
to Christianity.” “In this order one would be able to know, punish, improve,
cast out, or excommunicate those who did not behave in a Christian manner
according to the rule of Christ (Matthew xviii. 15). Here also it would be
possible to ask the Christians all to give alms together ; these would be given
willingly and shared out among the poor according to the example of St.
Paul, 2 Cor. ix. 1” (pp. 167 ff.). This is one of the chief passages upon which
the Pietists later on based their idea of the ecclesiola in ecclesia; Luther,
however, does not intend a withdrawal out of a secularized Church, but he
wishes to create progressive kernel organizations of the converting Spirit
within the Church. Luther, however, finds that he has not got the earnest
Christians whom he requires, and, on the other hand, he is afraid that “this
might lead to faction, so I am putting it out of my head”, that is, he would
not allow it to develop of itself (p. 169). Thus Luther renounces the idea of such
“peculiar communities” (p. 169). Eger, pp. 77-89, has a right view of this
subject.
280 (P* 49^0 On this point, cf. especially the treatise : Wider die himmlischen
Propheten, 1524 . In this Luther follows Paulinism. But it is important to note
that in so doing it is the ecclesiastical element of Paulinism which he follows.
The socially conservative position which Paulinism adopted in its own day
is not, it is true, like the Catholic ethic, an absorption of the secular institutions
into the Christian ethic, but it is a waiting and a toleration and an enduring
and a cautious use of the ordinances of a world which God still permits to exist.
But even this very restricted acceptation of the world was only possible to Paul
through his conception of grace, since this conception of grace fills the Christian
community as a whole with the redeeming energies of Christ, and therefore
takes away from them the responsibility of fixing a limit by a radical external
separation and activity of the individual ; see Wernle: Der Christ und die Siinde bei
Paulus, 1897, pp . 60-72, in which, however, the connection between the Pauline
“conception of theChurch” and the idea of Grace is not sufficiently emphasized^
840 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
This predominance of the idea of grace gives to the whole of religious thought
in general a bias to accept the existing order as a Divine decree which is not
to be altered by force.
221 (p. 498.) This idea of the impossibility of overcoming sin is a remarkable
divergence from Paulinism, which in the certainty of a complete renewal and
transformation of Christians considers it natural that sin should be overcome :
in it also the defects of individual Church members were regarded as stains
and shortcomings in the real ideal of the Church ; these are to be got rid of by
discipline, and will be burnt up in the Judgment and End of the World which
is imminent. Cf. Wernle: Der Christ und die Siinde , and Braun : Luthers Lehre von der
Concupiszenz, pp. 107-11 2. In that, however, there are also the sectarian elements
of Paul as they are contained in that Enthusiasm which he proclaims alongside
of the consummation of revelation in Christ. The sects until the present day for
this reason continue to appeal to these ideas. In Paulinism both types are
still together.
222 (p. 499.) For the naturalness of the idea of the Corpus Christianum see the
following passages in Lommatzsch , 258, 575, 282, 527 ff. That is plainly shown in
the description of the three hierarchies of the civil authority, of the household,
and of the clergy as estates of the Church. Cf. also Rieker: f, Rechtliche Stellung ,
pp. 66-71. Both recognize in this, and rightly, the continuation of the mediaeval
idea whose origin in the ideas of the primitive Church cannot, however, be
explained quite so easily and simply. In the second main section of this work
it was my intention to make this clear. If that result is right, we may then draw
the conclusion that in spite of all reactions to Paulinism and Augustinianism,
the Reformation ethic, and the social philosophy which issued from it, continues
the mingling of the Church and the world in an undifferentiated unity, and
only rearranges the relation between the elements which compose this unity;
so also Ehrhardt: La notion du droit nature /, pp. 308 ff.
223 (p. 500.) Cf. Luthardypp . 76 ff. : “Luther based his position on the distinc-
tion between the Kingdom of God and the kingdom of this world (as he calls
it), or, in other words, upon the tenet of the inwardness of Christianity con-
trasted with the external life in the world, which is based upon the Creation
(it would be more accurate to say, upon Reason). . . . After the doctrine of
justification by faith there is perhaps scarcely any other doctrine which Luther
mentions so often, and propagates so earnestly, as this doctrine of the spiritual
and inward character of the Kingdom of Christ, and of the difference between
it and the kingdom of this world, that is, the sphere of the natural created life.
Primarily, the Gospel has nothing at all to do with the external life ; it is wholly
concerned with eternal life ; it is not concerned with external ordinances and
institutions which might come into conflict with the ordinances of the world,
but with the hearts of men and their relation to God, with the grace of God,
with the forgiveness of sins, etc., in short, with the heavenly life. The charac-
teristic element of the Kingdom of Christ is the order of grace (and love),
the characteristic of the kingdom and the life of this world is the system of law.
Therefore they are quite different in quality, and do not belong to the same
plane; indeed, they belong to different worlds. To the one I belong as a
Christian, to the other as a man (this is the modern way of putting it, Luther
would have said : T belong to the one through the Gospel, and to the other
through the Lex Naturae'). For we live in two spheres of life, we are in heaven
and upon earth at the same time. . . . ‘Christ’s Kingdom*, says Luther, ‘is, and
ought to be, a Divine Kingdom, and yet the same spiritual Kingdom is inter-
woven with the kingdom of this world, and Christ and His disciples use the
PROTESTANTISM
841
world, but they do it all as pilgrims and strangers’, just as Christ also has
done. . . . Hence it is not the duty of Christ, or of the Gospel, to alter the
ordinances of the secular life, and to set up new ones. All that part of life is
under the control of its own laws, and of reason, and for that we do not need
the Holy Spirit. . . . ‘Therefore*, says Luther, ‘we must make a very clear
distinction between the two spheres, between that in which sin is punished
and that in which it is forgiven, between that in which rights are demanded
and that in which rights are renounced. In the Kingdom of God, which He
rules by the Gospel, there is no demanding of rights, and there is no question
of law, e^ferything is forgiveness and magnanimity and generosity, and there
is no wrath, and no punishment, but purely brotherly service and good deeds.
‘The creatures’, says Luther, ‘are all in existence before the Gospel comes,
that is, all secular matters and ordinances which have been constituted by men
according to reason, and by the Divinely implanted natural wisdom* (i.e.
through the Lex Naturae ). . . . ‘Therefore also the servants of Christ ought not
to have anything to do with these worldly matters, but simply to preach the
grace of God. So far as those matters are concerned, jurists may advise and
help and show people how to act.* . . . ‘Thus everything will go on just as it is
until the great change comes to all things ; for until then the Kingdom of God
has only an inward form, and Jesus rules simply in the hearts of men. . . .
For it is not the outward which matters, but the inward; Christ was concerned
simply with the inward. This alone is the meaning of the words of Christ —
especially in the Sermon on the Mount — in which He gives His rules for a
Christian life, that we ought not to swear, etc. He does not dream of laying
down rules for the outer life ; He is thinking only of inward and personal
behaviour. His words do not apply to the external calling, and to the official
conduct which that implies, but to the individual, and to his spirit, and the
inward personal attitude of mind and heart. For otherwise, if we are to under-
stand His Word as applying to external matters, Christ would overturn the
whole order of the world. For it would give rise to an insoluble contradiction
between the external behaviour in one’s calling and office upon earth* (in
this, indeed, he demands obedience to both systems of ethics, the ‘personal*
and the ‘official’, but, at the same time, he recognizes that inwardly they are
essentially inconsistent with each other). . . ‘For since Jesus only requires an
inward attitude, and only asks for an external renunciation when faith and
personal witness require it, He indirectly confirms all these external things,
possessions and the rest, and also makes it plain that all renunciation which
is not demanded by that duty is a dereliction of duty*. (Certainly a very
indirect and arbitrary compromise with the teaching of Jesus.). . . The
decisive point, which Luther always brought out in these questions, was that
he had learnt to distinguish between the inward personal spirit of the Christian,
and the outward attitude to the duty of his secular office and calling.” — To
that we must add this sentence of Luther’s : “For thyself thou remainest within
the Gospel, and thou abidest by the word of Christ, so that thou art willing to
receive a blow upon the other cheek, and thou dost allow men to take thy
cloak, if it only concerns thee and thine own affairs. Thus in this way all goeth
well together, that thou dost satisfy both the Kingdom of God, and the kingdom
of this world, outwardly and inwardly, if thou dost suffer at the same time
evil and wrong, and yet dost punish evil and wrong, and if thou dost resist
evil, and yet thou dost not resist it. . . .” Or the other saying : “So far as I am
a Christian, I must not care about money, or gather it, but only trust in God
with all my heart. But outwardly I may and ought to use temporal goods for
842 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
my own body, and for other people, so far as my worldly person is concerned.” —
That is quite manifestly a dualistic morality, based on absolutely contradictory
principles. The question is: How did Luther solve this evident problem?
Luthardt's explanation is that Luther made a distinction between the order of
Creation and the order of Redemption, between man as a human being and
man as a Christian ; from this point of view Redemption is the completion of
the Creation, and the Christian is the true human being. This, however, is a
theory which would only be possible to the modern reconciliation theology
(i.e. the Vermittelungstheologie of the middle of the nineteenth century). For
Luther the solution lay in the sphere of thought governed by the Patristic and
mediaeval ideas of Natural Law ; cf. Ehrhardt: La Notion du droit natural , who,
however, has only an imperfect knowledge of the origin and significance of
this point of view. While' Ehrhardt first of all rightly confirms and illustrates the
harsh contradiction between the secular ethic of law and the evangelical ethic
of love and suffering ( p . 290 ), pointing out that at the beginning Luther even
went the length of rejecting the Decalogue as a document of merely legal
morality, he also shows that Luther still retained the legal morality for the
unconverted who need a discipline, a frenum , and a remedium peccati , and also
for the real Christians who can only be protected by a system of law against
the abuse and exploitation of their radical spirit of love and readiness to
suffer, and, finally, because de lege naturae is necessary in order to secure peaceful
relationships in the State, the family, and in economic life (pp. 293 ff .) ; for the
latter see the passage in Luther’s great Commentary on the Galatians : “saepe a
me audistis, quod ordinationes politicae et oeconomicae sint divinae, quia
Deus ipse ordinavit et apportavit eas, ut solem lunam et alias creaturas”.
“This way of thinking leads Luther to affirm that there exists a natural divine
social order independent of the special revelation of God as such, which is in
the Bible, an eternal order, and in its principles, at least, unchangeable” (p. 293).
This is the well-known idea of the Lex Naturae , which is written in the hearts
of men, and which has now been adjusted to the state of fallen humanity as
a frenum and a remedium peccati , but which is also a necessary reasonable order of
natural social things in harmony with the Natural Law. For the relative Natural
Law, see the passage from the Commentary on Genesis quoted by Lommatzsch ,
p. 286: “Politia ante peccatum nulla fuit, neque enim ea opus fuit; est enim
politia remedium necessarium naturae corruptae. Oportet enim cupiaitatem
restringi vinculis legum et poenis, ne libere vagetur. Ideo politiam recte
dixeris regnum peccati. . . . Hoc enim unum et praecipuum agit politia, ut
peccatum arceat. ... Si enim homines non essent per peccatum mali facti,
politia nihil fuisset opus.” Thus he accepts also the relevant passages con-
cerning the Natural Law both in Roman law and in the Canon Law, which
otherwise he so sternly condemns. For him, however, the ultimate reason for
the possibility of combining the natural legal ethic with the Christian love-
ethic is finally the identification of the Decalogue with the Law of Nature
on the one hand, and with the moral Law of Christ on the other; further, in
contrast to his original rejection of the Decalogue he interprets it (in sharp
distinction from the ceremonial and political law of Moses) as the total content
of the moral demands of the Primitive State, of the Natural Law, and of the
Christian Law, and makes great use of the Bible, as well as of illustrations from
antiquity, in order to prove the source of the Law of Nature. In so doing, all
the old Catholic ideas have again been completely accepted, as is shown by
Lommatzsch , pp. 60-90 , more clearly than by Ehrhardt , p. 303. Thus Luther says
in his work, Against the Heavenly Prophets : “Moses’ law and the Natural Law
PROTESTANTISM
643
are one thing” (“ein Ding”). Cf. also Lommatzsch , p. 63, and the larger Cate-
chism: “The Ten Commandments are likewise written in the hearts of all
men, they are symbolical books” ( Muller , p. 460). The Decalogue and the
Christian law itself contain this dualistic ethic, which, therefore, represents
the contradiction between legalism and the commandment of love which is
the result of the adaptation of the Law of Nature to the conditions of the
fallen State ; thus this is the idea of the relative Natural Law, with which we
are familiar. The difference between this conception and the Catholic develop-
ment of the idea consists in this : that the dualistic ethic is not represented as
a gradual process, or as an ascent from the ethic of the Natural Law to the
peculiar achievements of the Christian ethic, in which the latter, in its entire
radicalism, is only binding on a special class of people, but that every individual,
equally, is laid under the obligation to obey both laws. We shall meet these
inconsistencies at every turn in the exposition of the social doctrines of
Lutheranism. Ehrhardt remarks somewhat naively : “But is not this distinction
between the exterior and the interior man abstract and artificial? and what is
the relation between justice according to Natural Law (a justice possible even
to non-Christians) and the justice of God?” (/?. 318). Lommatzsch , p. 606:
recognizes the inconsistency, and the problem which it contains, more deeply
and theoretically. In general, however, these writers do not know what to
make of these statements; the reason for this is that either they have no
knowledge, or only a very imperfect knowledge of the whole ancient Patristic
scholastic set of ideas which deal with the Law of Nature, and its organic
function which makes it possible for the ecclesiastical ethic to accept the world.
They explain them sometimes as a reaction towards Catholicism, contrary to
Luther’s own principles, sometimes as personal peculiarities and uncertainties
of Luther ; a man like Ehrhardt can even deny that Luther identified the Law
of Nature with the Decalogue (p. 3ig ), and in all these statements he only sees
an unconscious attempt on Luther’s part to adjust the historical bias in favour
of Natural Law, newly awakened by Humanism, to the Gospel ! And Lom-
matzsch can say : “Scarcely ever, however, does Luther display more theoretical
obscurity than in these definitions, this uncertainty affects nothing less than
his view of the relation of the supernatural to the natural, or of the revelation
of GckJ in the wider sense, to such a revelation in the narrower sense” (p. 7/).
G. Miiller: Luthers Stellung zum Recht , thinks (on p. 26) that the whole matter
sounds very much like the ideas of St. Augustine, but he thinks that inwardly
Luther had given them up !
284 (p. 503.) The clear recognition that the radical ethic would only influence
small groups of men, and that therefore the Christian ethic for a mass com-
munity needed the complement of the secular ethic, comes out in the Schrift von
weltlicher Obrigkeit , B.A., IV, /, p, 236 : A strict and really Christian fellowship
would not be possible. “Thou must first fill the world with earnest Christians
before thou canst govern them in a Christian and evangelical way. This,
however, thou wilt never be able to do, for the world and the masses are, and
remain, unchristian, even if all were baptized and called Christians. But as
the saying is, Christians dwell far from one another. Therefore it is not possible
that a Christian government (in the sense of the Sermon on the Mount) could
be set up in common over all the world, or over one country or a great number
of people. For the evil are always more numerous than the good ; therefore to
presume to try to rule a whole land or the world with the Gospel is like a
herdsman who would put together in one stable wolves, lions, eagles, and sheep,
and would allow them to mingle freely together. . . . Here, indeed, the sheep
844 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OE THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
would keep the peace and peaceably go to pasture and allow themselves to be
ruled, but they would not live long, nor would one animal have more chance
than another. Therefore we must deliberately separate the two kinds of rule
and allow both to remain, the one which makes men good and the other
which creates outward peace and prevents evil works; within this world
neither is sufficient without the other.” All this only makes sense on the
assumption of the necessity for a comprehensive popular Church. — From
another point of view Luther says the same thing in his famous introduction
to the Psalter, in which he points out that the Psalter expresses all the heights
and depths of religious and moral conditions, and is, therefore, better for the
Christian community than the mere narratives of the heroic acts of the saints.
“Finally, in the Psalter (through this presentation of various stages), there is
certainty and a well preserved guidance, that in it, without danger, we can
follow the example of all the saints (that is, of the religious souls who express
their feelings in the Psalms). For other examples and legends from the ‘dumb*
saints (that is, solely the account of their deeds without an expression of the
fluctuations of their inward life) produce many works which one cannot
imitate : indeed, they bring before us works which are dangerous to copy, and
which often cause sects and tumults and which lead and even tear men away
from the Communion of Saints (that is, from the Church). But the Psalter
keeps thee in the communion of saints and preserves thee from tumults ; for it
teaches thee in joy and fear, in hope and sorrow, to be and to speak as all
the saints (that is, average religious men) have thought and have spoken”
(IV,i,p.8).
225 (p- 5°4-) The Decalogue, which in the Early Church and in the early
Middle Ages was scarcely used at all in the teaching of the Church, was
used a great deal in the later Middle Ages in connection with the confession
(Beichtspiegel ) . ( Kawerau , in the volume which has already been indicated,
p. 43.) It was only regarded as a central Christian doctrine, by which the law
and its opposite, grace, and also the doctrine of Substitution and the Christian
ethic, are tested, in Protestantism, and indeed Calvinism, owing to its stricter
ethical parish organization, used it still more than Lutheranism ; the foundation,
however, in both is the same. For the absolute position which it had here
attained, see Lommatzsch , pp. 60-90. The more detailed development of the
doctrine, with its underlying theory of the Two Tables (I cannot tell how far
this idea was peculiar to Luther ; in any case, in its detailed treatment and its
opinions it is a mirror of the ideas of the Reformation), and with its identifica-
tion of Natural Law, Christian law, and Decalogue (also it is thus the only
connection which remains in this quite anti-philosophical theology between
Reason and Revelation, Nature and Grace) is illustrated by Eger , pp. 99-118 ,
and Hupfeld , pp. 75-104 , and Troeltsch: Vemunft und Offenbarung bei Joh. Gerh.
und Melancthon , 1891 , pp. 1 37-173; while I was writing this work I was not then
sufficiently acquainted with the significance of the whole group of ideas dealing
with the Decalogue and the Natural Law in the whole body of traditional
theology, nor did I realize its connection with Luther, and I attributed this
doctrine too much to the mind of Melancthon. In this connection the great
new element which Luther introduced was the distinction between the justitia
spirituals and the justitia civilis, between the motus spirituals and general natural
ethical obligations ; the latter are good in a Christian sense when, as the First
Table requires, they are exercised “in faith”. For this “exercising in faith” of
the works which in themselves are required by the Natural Law, see the
detailed presentation of the subject in Thieme, pp. 19-102. This sentence
PROTESTANTISM
845
throws a light on the whole : “In this work (that is, in faith in Christ) all works
must be exercised, and from its goodness they receive an influence which is
like a Divine gift” (p. 76). The difficulties, however, created by this gathering
up in the Decalogue have not by any means disappeared. In the Primitive
State the Decalogue and the Natural Law, “the Law of Nature and of Love”,
are certainly quite the same. At the Fall, however, through the secular order
of law, the Natural Law was adapted to the fallen State, and now the question
arises: how far can both of these once more be united in the state of sin?
Eger ( pp . 92 ff.) also formulates the problem thus, and in a very pertinent
manner.-f-At this point there are the most important developments of Luther’s
ethic. The two poles of this development are shown by the works Von Weltlicher
Obrigkeit, wieweit man ihr Gehorsam schuldig sei 1323, and the Auslegung der
Bergpredigt, 1532. In the former work Luther says expressly the Catholics had
thus combined the Sermon on the Mount and the obligations of practical life
by relegating them to different classes of people, and by making the distinction
between consilia and praecepta , whereas he regards the claim of the Sermon on
the Mount and of Paul for the absolute ethic of love, which renounces law
and force, as binding on all Christians without exception. The same Christians,
however, are alsd taught to admit the claim of practical life, the recognition
of law and authority ; in the form, however, which it has displayed since the
Fall, that is, in the legal order, which has been instituted as a frenum and
remedium peccati ; this legal order, namely, issues from reason ; it has also been
explicitly appointed by God (in the Old Testament), and, in the New Testa-
ment, it has also been expressly confirmed by Christ through His own obedience
to it, His patience, and His endurance. The Christian now belongs to both
these separate and contradictory orders of life ; since the great majority are not
true Christians in the sense of the Sermon on the Mount, and need the relative
Natural Law, that is, the use of law and force for the good and order of their
earthly life, and since also Christians need this order as a protection against the
misuse of their willingness to suffer, he submits to this law out of love to the
nlass of the unconverted, and out of obedience to God’s law. Both these orders
are to be kept strictly separate; the civil authority in particular (which has
been instituted solely for the repression of sin, and, therefore, is restricted to the
external and secular sphere) may not interfere with the affairs of the spiritual
and Christian sphere ; least of all may the governments which have remained
Papist and unbelieving do this, but otherwise their right to exist is not to be
opposed. On the contrary, however, the spiritual ethic of love may not interfere
with the State order of law, nor attempt to make its radical Christian piety of
love into a law and a programme of social reform for the masses. For the latter
need the law ; the principles of the Sermon on the Mount applied to the non-
Christian masses of the population would simply lead to all kinds of abomina-
tions. Christians, indeed, have a double position, and, like Paul, they must
endure the non-Christian ordering of the world and let it continue to exist.
It is clear that this treatise in which, in some strange way, people have tried
to find the principles of freedom of conscience and of the modern State, still
holds a very crudely dualistic standpoint ; the Sermon on the Mount “certainly
teaches that Christians should use no worldly sword or law amongst them-
selves ; but it does not forbid that we should serve and be subject to those who
wield the temporal sword and administer the law ; but much rather because
thou dost not need such things, nor ought thou to have them, nor ought thou
to serve those who have not gone so far as thou, and who still need the same”
(B. A., IV, r, p . 23 9). This is the relative Natural Law which each Christian
846 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
has to accept for the sake of the existing masses of non-Christians, even when,
as an individual, he admits the claim of the principles of the Sermon on the
Mount ; indeed, no one ought to try to get rid of this obligation and constitute
special groups of those who are perfect. The right meaning of the Sermon on
the Mount is “that a Christian shall be so set himself to suffer evil and injustice
without desiring to avenge himself, nor to protect himself by law, that he most
certainly will not need worldly power and law for himself. But for others he
may and should (as a judge, executioner, or soldier) seek revenge, law, protec-
tion, aid, and in that capacity do whatever he can. Thus authority will also
help and protect him, whether of itself, or through the acts of others, but
without any complaint or search of his own. When this does not take place
he must let himself be accused and despised, and ‘resist not evil*, as Christ
has taught us. And be thou certain that this Word of Christ is not a counsel
for the perfect, as the Sophists do falsely say, but that it is a strict command-
ment binding on all Christians alike. . . . And do not go with the multitude,
and the common customs, for there are few Christians upon earth. . . . And
God’s Word also is something other than a common custom” ( p . 245). Here,
again, the approximation to the sect-type is very evident ; the difference, also,
is plain, namely, the recognition of the relative Lex Naturae add of natural and
existing conditions for the sake of the unity of the national Church ( Volkskirche ) .
This dualism, however, disappears almost entirely in the exposition of the
Sermon on the Mount. Here the presupposition of action is the official position,
and class, as it has been appointed by God, and a means of brotherly love as
well as a Divine command which men ought to obey. The legal order is
regarded as a system of classes, which, owing to the fact that they have been
appointed by God, are holy. They are now simply “Divine callings” ( p . 292).
The exercise of one’s calling, and the estimate of “the calling”, and of the
social system, as a system which has been brought about by, and maintained
by Providence for the good of Christendom : this idea now becomes the main
content of the Lutheran ethic. The love which exercises that which in itself
is not necessary for a Christian, namely, submission to the legal order for the
good of one’s neighbour, leads to that idea of obedience, and of faith in
Providence, which exalts the State, the social order, and the law as Divine
ordinances, in which it is a simple duty of obedience to remain, and tp serve
one’s neighbour. Eger has brought this out very well in his informative work,
and at the same time he rightly points out that in spite of this the world-order
is not yet considered to possess an ethical value of its own. Men serve God
in vocationey not per vocationem. In other directions, however, the whole view is
altered. Since the State no longer feels that it has no right to attempt to
influence matters of religion because it belongs to a lower order, but that now,
as a Christian government, it is under the obligation to serve the Church and
the Truth, so also Christians are no longer to maintain an attitude of merely
passive endurance towards the law. This is what he now says about the legal
system: “What does the righteousness of this world mean except that every
man should do in his class what he ought? What does that same law of one’s
class mean? What does it mean to have rights as men and women, as children,
and as domestic servants? or what does it mean to have civil rights? Surely all
this means that they are to look after and rule other people, and thus exercise
their office with care and faithfulness, and that also truly and willingly they are
to render the same service and obedience to others” (/>. 500). “All this has God
commanded, so it cannot be unclean, indeed it is even the purity with which
God is sought. Thus, if a judge exercise his office and condemn an evil-doer
PROTESTANTISM
847
to death, in so doing this is not his office and action, but the office and act
of God. Therefore it is a good, pure, and holy work (provided, of course, that
he is a Christian), which he could not do if he had not already a pure heart”
(/>. 306). In explicit contrast to the renunciation of one’s own rights which
was required in the passage quoted above, people are now exhorted first of
all to try to live in peace and to get on with people : “If, however, that cannot
be and thou canst not endure it, thou hast the law and the government of the
land whither thou mayest go to seek it in an orderly manner” (p. 316). These
changes are just as decided as those which were described previously in relation
to the connection between Church and State, freedom and compulsion, and
both these alterations are related to each other. For the earlier demand for
freedom and separation from the State was based upon a low estimate of the
State and of the legal system. In its later form, however, Luther’s ethic remained
permanent, and the explanation of the Decalogue in the two catechisms has
given it its permanent classic form down to the present day.
220 (p* 5°4*) Cf. Eger: Anschauungen Luthers von Beruj \ p. 124: “It does not
seem superfluous to point out how strongly the study of the Old Testament
has affected the Lutheran view and caused this constantly increasing openness
towards the worid. The passages which have been just quoted about the
value of earthly gifts and possessions have been almost entirely drawn from
expositions of various writings of the Old Testament.” “In the Old Testament
there is indeed no trace of detachment from the world, of indiff erence to earthly
things and earthly conditions ; it is, therefore, under all circumstances a more
sure method of'gaining a wholesome understanding of that which the earth
can offer than the New Testament which is exposed to so much misinterpreta-
tion ( !) The sphere within which the Christian lives and works in trust in
God is now in Luther’s view God’s world.” Thus in reality Luther’s economic
ethic and his ethic of the family is drawn very largely from the Jewish Wisdom
literature. Only this can scarcely be an unconscious effect of the Old Testament,
but on the contrary an attempt to find in the Old Testament a justification for
things which the New Testament would not tolerate. We shall see how Calvinism
had to go much farther in this direction in order to maintain its Scriptural
character.
227 (fi* 5°B.) This depreciation of the values of the State and of Society,
making them mere forms and presuppositions for the loving exercise of faith
(since the love of one’s neighbour is best exercised through using the institu-
tions which serve the welfare of Society), still characterizes the ethic of modern
Lutheranism. At the same time science is granted a certain standard of value
as a means which is essential for the exercise of one’s calling and for the
“dominion over Nature” which is absolutely necessary to Society, and art as
a “recreation” in order to preserve freshness in the work in one’s calling.
Cf. Gottschick: Ethik , p. 127: “The secular moral associations in their profes-
sional organization are the requisite means for maintaining the natural life of
humanity which is the indispensable presupposition for the transformation of
humanity into the Kingdom of God. Luther’s objective theory of the Lex
Divina Naturalis as the basis of Society is thus replaced by the witness of history,
which shows that according to the Will of God the different classes of secular
callings are intended to serve the purpose of the Kingdom of God. If this is
true of the civil calling, in which one gains a livelihood, it is all the more
true of the Christian calling, if to that are added all the moral and other tasks
which result from the regular relations of the individual in the family, in
Society, in the State, and in the Church.” Herrmann: Ethik 8 , 1304, p. 138:
848 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
“We only then show ourselves as Christians in the world when it is natural
to us to see the working of God in the inexhaustible formative power of Nature
(that is, the Lex Naturae of Luther, without his application to definite and
permanent institutions) : hence we should value a s the basis of our order of
life and as forms of our activity which have been given to us by God, the
naturally established human associations which we find in the world already.”
Just as Luther regarded the class guild, absolutist and agrarian form of life
as a condition which was permanently demanded by Nature, and one
which could be approximated to Christianity on the side of the external life,
so here an unlimitedly mobile shaping of these things, including the modern
militaristic, capitalistic, and scientific and aesthetic civilization, is regarded as
the “form” of the natural life which is to be inspired by faith. Likewise, in
v. d. Goltz: Grundlagen der christlichen Sozialethik , who in his “sociological”
section develops the Lutheran doctrine of Natural Law by a modern doctrine
of the “natural basic forms in the family, the State, and Society”, and then
places these “forms” under the influence of the Christian spirit; p. 282: “In
Christianity religion takes over the guidance of human social life. . . . The
dominion of the Spirit over nature is here led to a gradual completion, and all
individual and social disharmonies are smoothed out, ydiile the peculiar
energies of the various social groups are also brought into harmony.” Likewise
also Luthardt: Kompendium der Ethik , i8g6 : “Since the spirit is only the truth of
man and Christianity, the truth of the earthly life, so the truth of the morality
of the natural life consists in this, that this morality shall be achieved with the
sense and spirit and moral power which Christianity provides. . . . Gratia non
tollit, sed sanat naturam.” Everywhere any possibility of an inner opposition
between the natural forms of the ethic of civilization and the radical spirit
of love (whose eternal aims ought to fill them) has been entirely forgotten,
and Luther’s conflicts around this problem are simply regarded as “Catholic
relics”. The saying of Luthardt reminds us directly of the Catholic principle :
“Gratia praesupponit ac perficit naturam”, and shows at the same time the
striking difference. In Catholicism Nature and Grace are different in degree,
in Protestantism they finally come together as form and content.
220 (p. 509.) Cf. Eger , pp. 124 ff. : “That which has been said above about the
alteration in the conception of faith and of obedience to the revealed word of
God, and of the way in which obedience is ranged against the promises, and
those again are set over against the commandments of God, finds its clearest
expression in the passage out of the Enarr. in Genesin : ‘Hacc sunt verae laudes
obedientiae, quae tantum estvel promissionum vel praeceptorumdivinorum. , ”
A similar tendency emerges in the fact that the theory of ‘faith and love”
which was laid down in the Liberty of a Christian Man as the mark of the Christian
life, is replaced by the principle of “faith and obedience towards God”.
“After we have placed our righteousness solely upon the promised Seed,
promising also that we will be obedient to God, and that in this temporal life
we will do and observe what He has commanded. . . . Therefore both must
be together, faith and obedience to God.” This makes the works of the Christian
holy in contrast with those of the pagan because they are carried out in the
spirit of faith in Christ and in obedience to God. The Kirchenpostil e has similar
ideas: “God wills that after our sins have been forgiven we should live in
obedience to His commands.” “That which leads us to obedience is, more and
more, not the revealed grace of God in Christ which wins our hearts, but the
formal authority of the Divine word” (p, 125). The parallelism of the knowledge
of faith and of the moral law is characteristic, both have taken the same course
PROTESTANTISM
%
of development, for the same reason, namely, for the sake of the conception of
the Church. Curiously enough, theologians have complained a good deal of
the first development, while they have praised the second, since it provides
them with that humanitarian theory of Christianity which accepts the world,
which they find so necessary at the present day. Therefore, in general, the
limitations of the modern verdict on Luther, which praises his earlier indi-
vidualism, which was like that of the sect-type, and complains of his prejudice
in favour of a Catholic negation of the world, while it regards the dogmatism
of Luther as an older man as a reaction towards Catholicism, and praises his
attitude of acceptance of the world as modern progress. In reality, both the
latter arc inseparable from the Church-type, as the two former were insepar-
able from all tendencies towards the sect- type. This shows how fruitful the
differentiation between the sect- type and the Church- type which was made in
//, g is for our subject as a whole. This will also be very evident in dealing
with Calvinism and the Baptist movement.
230 (p. 510.) On this point cf. my treatment of the subject in the Kultur der
Gegenwart. Characteristic passages in Herrmann: Verkehr, p. 208 : “This does not
mean leaving and fleeing from the world as they (the Papists) imagine; for
thou mayest be ia whatever kind of life or position that thou wilt — for thou
must be something because thou art living upon earth — God has not told thee
to depart from them, but to live among them ; for each man has been created
and born for the sake of other men. Wherever now thou art I say, and in
whatever position thou dost find thyself there thou must flee from the world.”
“Thus I am separated from the world and yet am in the world.” Thus also
Luthardt says rightly: “Therefore in the sphere of outward activity we are
not to mark off a special sphere of ascetic activity, but we are to bring the
ascetic factor into all our activity” ( Ethik Luthers , p. 63). Braun: Concupiszenz •
“Thus there lies truth in the paradox : by the very fact that Luther drove the
monastic ideal to its farthest limit he destroyed it in its very root” (p. 57).
That is what Max Weber and I mean when we speak of an “asceticism within
this world” of Protestantism, in opposition to the Catholic asceticism,
which is above — or perhaps better — alongside of, this world.
23 °a 513.) This statement of the midway position of Lutheranism between
a systeiy of moderate asceticism and ecclesiastical guidance of Society on the
one hand, and a sectarian enthusiastic radicalism on the other hand, is specially
adduced for the Christian social problem of the present day. According to the
genuine Christian social idea it would be good to retain the free non-legal
spirit of the ethic of love, and to leave social reform itself solely to political and
social experts who should draw the spiritual energies they need for their task
out of this spirit. Certainly R. Sohm expresses himself to me in a letter: “the
Gospel is understood as containing a social programme. Through that the
Gospel became a new law which was established now in a relative and now
in a radical form. But, as I believe, the development consisted in the fact that
this standpoint was superseded, and I consider that the first great step towards
progress in this direction was taken in Luther’s Reformation. The second
step, which led to the present day, came through the Enlightenment. . . . The
ethical consequence of brotherly love which is given through the love of God
cannot be gathered up in some law or programme which will hold good for
all time, and they are, therefore, no essential part of the Gospel, which for all
time is a message of salvation which is ever valid, whose content is solely
religious and which brings forth social energies but no social programme.”
In any case, however, that is not the meaning of Lutheran thought in its
VOL. H. CG
850 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
application to social things, for according to Luther’s idea the latter are
not free and mobile, but through the Law of Nature they are bound up with
an entirely anti-capitalist tendency; the modern social development was
rejected by Luther in the name of Nature as well as in the name of the Gospel
as the next section will show. On the other hand, however, even the Gospel
for Luther is not the personal spirit of love which offers power to Christianize
social institutions which in themselves have become necessary in the course of
history, but an individual ethic of unconditional love and readiness to suffer
which does not penetrate and shape the official morality of law and property,
but tolerates and suffers it as an opposition introduced by sin which cannot
be overcome. Calvinism would come better under this heading, which in
point of fact penetrates existing Society with the Christian spirit and knows no
invincible opposition between official and individual morality (public and
private morality). But all such spirit must in application become a programme
and a law, and thus it became that also in Calvinism, whereby its law was
indeed not unchangeable, but it adapted itself with great elasticity to the
various conditions of life among the Calvinistic nations ; this will become plain
in the third section. The classic theory formulated by Sohm is rather a very
modern theory, as he himself seems to suggest. Its assumption is the insight
into the impossibility of stabilizing social institutions and the judgment of
these things according to their immanent purely secular necessity, and with
that precisely the withdrawal of religion to that which is purely spiritual and
religious. It contains at the same time the equally modern demand that the
Christian spirit should penetrate the social world, that is, the demand for a
uniform ethic which, in contrast with Luther’s dualism, should accept the ever-
changing social world, and still at the same time penetrate and mould it with
its own spirit. The question is, however, whether and how this is possible at
all in face of modern social life, and whether it does not make it necessary to
have a most inward transformation of the Christian ethic in order to draw in
the secular life values even when a penetration of spirit of the existing neces-
sities merely is demanded, and even when these are to be seriously conformed
to the ideal. Here, however, we have reached the problems of the modern
Christian ethic, which rather resemble those of Calvinism than those of
Lutheranism; but it is no longer possible to solve them in the traditional
Scriptural manner (i.c. O.T.) of Calvinism. Not from the Bible, but from
the Christian spirit, that is, from the progressive Christian principle, these
questions must be answered to-day, if it is really possible to answer them at all.
This, however, is rather different from the old Lutheran position. This is a
modern way of thinking along evolutionary historical lines, as indeed indirectly
the words of Sohm seem to suggest. The new position is a result of a process of
progress which arose out of the history of the Middle Ages, passed through
Protestantism, and which leads from Protestantism to a modern form of
Christianity which arose out of the latter, but is not identical with it. This
fundamental content which can everywhere be recognized reveals itself also
in the problem of the social doctrines of Christianity ; cf. my work on Pro-
testantism in Kultur der Gegenwart , /, IV > /, pp. 634-649.
881 (P- 5*6.) On this point see Moller-Kawerau : Lehrbuch der Kirchengeschichte ,
IIP , 7907; Riecker: Die Rechtliche Stellung; and, above all, Sohm: Kirchenrecht , L
The work of Sohm is not only extremely able, but it also has a very unprejudiced
eye for the historical and actual which has not been dimmed by modern
ideas of Church-order. Here the Lutheran doctrine is understood in its most
inward and real sense. The paradox of Sohm’s argument only arises in this,
PROTESTANTISM
851
that it treats the over-idealistic miraculous Lutheran conception of the Church
which Lutheranism itself has completed by a very realistic secular Church law
as something which also without this completion can and should exist ; and
the vulnerable historical point is the identification of that idealistic Lutheran
conception of the Church with that of the Primitive Church, which had no
legal tradition at all and which works not with conceptions which are detached
from law, but with legal conceptions which have not been defined, and, above
all, which places the ministry under the Enthusiastic conception of the charisma.
Of that more anon ; also see above, pp. 481 jj . The point at which I believe that
I must diyerge from Sohm's treatment of the facts will be treated later; cf.
Note 236.
232 (p. 518.) On this, above all, see Sohm : the starting-point, the productive,
miraculous power of the Word and not of the congregation (pp. 511-513) ; the
pastoral character of jurisdiction based upon a free spirit of love and sub-
mission (pp. 522 and 523) ; the charismatic character of the ministry which
depends upon the willing affection and permission of the congregation, only
otherwise to be appointed according to order (pp. 500-505, 518) ; judgment on
doctrine a matter for the pastors, but only as professional organs for self-
interpretation of tlfe Scriptures or as the mouthpiece of Christ (pp. 521 , 432 ff .) ;
the order of love in the congregation in contrast with the order of law (pp. 434-
436). For Lutheranism the decisive point is faith in the wonderful spontaneous
power of the Word of God to form churches, see the passage in Sohm , p. 432 .
Similar passages, p. 616; it is the main idea also in the later orthodoxy, see
Schmidt: Die Dogmatik der ev.-luth. Kirche 8 , 1876, p. 432. This supernatural and
objective spirituality, combined with the idea that the legal State which aims
at secular well-being is not sufficient for this sphere but may serve it, is the
source of the characteristic expressions of Luther about the relation between
the sacred and the secular even in the case of those which sound most modern.
284 (p. 519.) Cf. Sohm, 622 and 627 : “And if it were necessary that the
secular government, on occasion, should take up the question of those who
despise the ban of the Church” (at first purely spiritual, carried out by the
pastor and the congregation), in the Wittenberg Concord of 1545, which was
signed by Luther and which dealt with the future form of Church government.
Sohm rightly describes this as the specifically Lutheran view, as contrasted with
the view of Melancthon and of most of the others who wanted to give to the
Church courts the immediate power “to judge according to the Holy Scriptures
and also according to the usual laws which are in our country . . . arctiora
mandata with the menace of serious punishments, like fines, imprisonments, etc.”
and who wished to compel the secular authorities “straight away, without
delay, to carry into effect the verdict of the ecclesiastical authorities” (p. 628),
226 (p. 519.) On the whole subject, see the illuminating remarks of Sohm:
pp. 542-633. Here also the right explanation for this development out of the
renunciation of the supernatural idealism, from Sohm's personal point of
view an effect of lack of faith for which he makes Melancthon especially
responsible, cf. 612 . — As Sohm shows, Luther always protested against this
development ; but the passages quoted by Sohm reveal rather a protest of a
theological and Scriptural nature against decisions of a juridical and Canon
law nature than a conflict between the voluntary order of love and a legal
order of compulsion; for Luther is ready to hand over sinners in life and
doctrine to the secular arm for further secular penalties. This means that the
twofold order is differentiated more in theory than in anything else : actually
in practice it all amounts to a legal and compulsory attitude even in matters
852 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
of Christian doctrine and discipline. The latter were found to be necessary and
the formal decisions of Luther were practically ineffective. It could not be
helped, p. 6ig : “The desire for a legal order was here stronger than faith in
the rule of Christ and the power of the Word. Men desired a Church-order
as an aid for the Word. Very well, it came, but it came in order to appoint the
territorial prince as the lord also of the Church.’ * — For the way in which it
came, see K . Muller: Anf tinge tier Konsistorialverfassung , Hist. £., 302 , pp. 1-30 .
238 (p- 521 .) In this I have expressed my own attitude, as briefly as possible,
to Sohm's famous thesis. It contains the important sociological viewpoint that
every kind of Church-order is the law of the Church, and as thaf which is
appointed to protect great supernatural things it is itself drawn into this
supernatural order, and in so doing it receives qualities which make it quite
incommensurable for the precise and actual jurists. Further, within this
law there is the inconsistency that it binds and hampers the quite individual
religious life by formal and purely objective standards. Only this is a con-
tradiction which does not belong to the fact of a law in the Church, but to the
conception of the Church as an institution which protects by strict rules an
objective treasure of revelation. The ideal conception of the Church as of an
institution which can be freely developed and ruled by the Word is a Utopia
of faith. Historically the question is whether Luther purely and exclusively
sanctioned this Utopia of faith as Sohm believes, and whether the introduc-
tion of a Divine Law in reality can only be laid to the account of Melanc-
thon, the politicians and the consistories, or, in other words, whether
Luther (who had retained so many mediaeval Catholic elements of the con-
ception of the Church, especially that of the objective doctrine which can
alone give salvation and of the united Christian Society) at this point really
went so far as to exclude all Divine Law from the Church and every kind of
Divinely based rule for securing pure doctrine and the ordering of morals.
The answer depends on the interpretation of Luther’s doctrine of the office
of the ministry. Sohm interprets the Lutheran conception of the ministry
( p . 473) quite simply from the point of view of the primitive Christian charis-
matic idea and overestimates Luther’s own expressions about the charismatic
character of the ministry,/?. 474 : “The heart of the doctrine of Luther . . . that
the pastor exercises his office ‘only on account of the congregation’, only in the
name of ‘the Church*. His ministry, from the spiritual point of view, he can
only have from God through the gift which God has given him, but the exercise
of the ministry is only possible to him, not legally, but solely because he is
permitted by the congregation ( !).” Luther, however, alongside of this super-
natural charismatic conception of the ministry also undoubtedly had the
supernatural legal conception which represented the ministry of the pure
Word as the truth of Scripture and formed the official expression of the com-
munity ordained by God, which is bound to the assumption of an orderly
calling excluding all disorder and fanaticism. The latter, in the prevailing
point of view, is rightly regarded as the central point of a spiritual law since
existence and a proper calling de jure are required for it, and the exercise of the
Scriptural understanding of the congregation is bound up with these official
interpreters of the Word; it is only the manner of the calling which is left
free to human custom. The above presentation of this subject is based upon
this latter conception.
187 (P* 5 22 -) For these externa disciplina , which the Government is bound to
exercise as custos utriusque tabulae from the point of view of the State, and as
membrum praecipuum ecclesiae from the point of view of the Church, see the words
PROTESTANTISM
853
of Melancthon quoted by Sohm : “Magistratus est custos primae et secundae
tabulae legis, quod ad externam disciplinam attinet, hoc est prohibere externa
scelera et punire sontes debet et proponere bona exempla. . . . Etsi enim
magistratus non mutat corda nec habet ministerium spiritus, tamen habet
suum officium externae disciplinae conservandae etiam in iis, quae ad primam
tabulam pertinent (that is, in questions of worship and orthodoxy in doc-
trine). . . . Cum quaeras, quae sint officia magistratuum, tibi pingito magis-
tratum cui de collo pendeant tabulae duae legis Moysi. Horum custos esse
debet politicus gubernator, quoad externam disciplinam attinet. Nam haec
sunt summae leges, ex quibus ceterae honestae leges omnes tamquam ex
fontibus derivantur.” For the way in which these externa disciplina for the
maintenance of a Christian external order are to be used by the secular
officials, see the Visitations Instruction of 1527, Sohm,p. 6oy\ “Officials, jurymen,
town councillors, noble judges, also ought to punish matters which are not
to be borne among Christians . . . like the following: frivolous swearing
and using the Name of God in vain, item gluttony, drunkenness, gaming,
idleness, item treating matters of faith flippantly or contemptuously in wine-
or beer- or drink-houses, or quarrelling about them (thus a system of denuncia-
tion, which, according to Wappler's reports of law proceedings actually became
very dangerous to many Anabaptists), adultery and fornication, disobedience
of children to their parents, and especially when these attack their parents
with words, or with their hands, item if the children get engaged without
their parents’ will or knowledge.” Absence from Church, disturbances in
Church, and, of course, false doctrine, are all punishable offences. The punish-
ments which are preferable are imprisonment rather than fines, which are
considered “self-interested”. Later on, the consistories exercise the same
discipline in their own name (p. 615) with fines, imprisonments, and corporal
punishment, also with the great ban which is the result of the civil boycott,
“ suspensio ab officio exclusion from the council, denial of the right to exercise
his trade or his livelihood”. People even thought of building a special con-
sistorial prison. These things only show how everything was dominated by the
idea of the uniform Christian Society. Luther also desires all these things, only
not at the disposal of the spiritual authority, but of the secular authority as
such, which he justifies by the fiction that all these crimes also have a civil
aspect which the State ought to punish as a contravention of its own order !
Calvinism, on the contrary, places all these matters under the control of the
ecclesiastical court of discipline itself, which has the power to inflict very
effective “purely spiritual” punishments, and thus, through the Church, by
spiritual means, it establishes a social order which Lutheranism handed over
to the civil government, and which, in the mixed consistories, came under the
standpoint of the interests of the State entirely, and for that reason it did not
develop a religious and ethical influence at all.
288 (P* 522.) Gerhard in Schmidt: Dogmatik , p. 452: “Status sive ordines in
ecclesia a Deo instituti numerantur tres, videlicet ecclesiasticus, politicus et
oeconomicus, quos etiam hierarchias appellare consueverunt. Oeconomicus
ordo inservit generis humani multiplicationi, politicus ejusdem defensioni,
ecclesiasticus ad salutem aeternam promotioni. Oec. ordo oppositus est a Deo
vagis libidinibus, polit. tyrannidi et latronciniis ; eccles. haeresibus ac doctrinae
corruptelis.” These divisions are very ancient, see XXVIII , p . 624 ; also Bohmer:
Luther, p. 220; in a Bishop Gerhard of Cambrai, 1036 ( Luthardt : Comp.,p . 26/),
and then again in Stephen of Prague and Nicholas of Clemanges, K&hler:
Staatslehre der Vorreformatoren (Jahrbb.f. deutsche Theologie , XX, p. 95). Also in
854 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Wimpfeling , 1501 , see Roscher: Nationalokonomik , p. 37. In the last resort that
really is the Platonic classification of classes in his politeia. The theory goes
right through the whole ethic and dogmatics of Lutheranism, and has again
been taken up by the ethic of modern confessional Lutheranism, whereby it is
admitted that they owe to Pietism a broadening beyond the narrow conception
of callings into the “general Christian humanity, for example, of home and
foreign missions” ; see Luthardt: Compendium der Ethik, pp. 267-263.
339 (p. 523.) For this idea of the Corpus Christianum , see specially the excellent
treatment of the subject by Rieker ; similarly Sohm , p. 340 : “We only gain the
right standpoint for the complete understanding of the question with which we
are concerned when we get rid of all our present-day ideas about Church and
State and transport ourselves into the spirit of the Church politics of the
sixteenth century, which were still very much determined by the Middle Ages.
The conceptions of Church and State in the present sense are still unknown,
the fundamental conception is that of Christendom. In Christendom God has
appointed ‘two swords*: the spiritual and the secular. It is the duty of both
to govern Christendom, but with different aims and therefore with a different
authority, the one with spiritual authority and the other with secular authority.
The nature of these ‘two swords’, and therefore of their mutual relationship in
authority, had to be determined. This is what Luther did. His doctrine of the
division between the two forms of government represents solely the reformed
doctrine of the Middle Ages of the ‘two swords*. Clearly it does not regard
the question according to the relation between two organizations, but solely
the question of the relation between two authorities . . . , which both belong
to a great organism of Christendom.” Because the whole civilization of Luther-
anism is based upon this, I have described this in the Kultur der Gegenwart,
4 , as a certainly very penetrating transformation of mediaeval civilization.
Bohmer , p. 121 , however, gives it as his opinion that this is “simply an assertion
and, indeed, an assertion which excludes absolutely a clear insight into the
nature of Protestantism as well as of Catholicism” !
am (P- 5 a 3-) For the ethic of Lutheranism, cf. Troeltsch : Joh . Gerhard und
Melancthon; Honnicke: Studien zur altprot. Ethik , 1302 (also my review, G. G. A .,
1902, pp. 577-583); Hupfeld: Ethik Joh. Ger hards, 1908 (also my Review, Th. L.,
/909) ; also the Geschichten der christlichen Ethik , by Gass and Luthardt; Th. £iegler
remains, here also, on the fringe of the subject. Instructive presentation of the
modern Lutheran ethic, but quite steeped in the Lutheran spirit, Gottschick:
Ethik, 1907; Luthardt: Compendium der Ethiky 1896 , rich in quotations from the
orthodox ethic; Hofmann: Theolog. Ethik, 1878, an excellent even though
modernized description of the spirit of the Lutheran ethic. Both the latter are
visibly full of the spirit of the triumph of this ethic in Church and State after
the interim period of the Enlightenment, and they give some idea of the
instinctive connection between the modern Conservative party and the spirit
of the Lutheran ethic. A magnificent analysis of the Lutheran ethic in relation
to the Calvinistic ethic is given by Schneckenburger , cf. Darstellung des Lutherischen
und Reformierten Lehrbegriffes, 1855 . — We must always remember in every
presentation of the Protestant ethic the Lutheran special dogma of the exposition
of the Sermon on the Mount, according to which this only rules the spirit of
Christians towards Christians without legally binding them to their concrete
examples, and, above all, assumes alongside of this exhortation to a spiritual
outlook at the same time the civil and legal official and vocational ethic as a
legal order instituted by God. That is a fundamental Scriptural dogma as
important as the doctrine of justification by faith, and it stands over against
PROTESTANTISM
855
the Catholic dogma that the Sermon on the Mount contains the evangelical
counsels of a one-sided perfection ethic alongside of the ethic of the world for
the special class of the monks, as well as against the sect-dogma that the whole
of Christian Society ought to obey these rules, and therefore as a religious group
ought to withdraw from the State and from the world. This is a fundamental
dogma of exegesis of Lutheranism contrasted with Catholics and Baptists.
Hence also the characteristic historic construction of the Lutherans according
to which the post-apostolic and primitive Church ethic under pagan influences
again became uncertain about the right understanding of the Sermon on the
Mount ( Hofmann, p, 294). In reality, the Protestant dogma of the Sermon on
the Mount*was not yet present and could not be present. It only became possible
through the mediaeval development over which the relative opposition must
not lead us astray.
240 (p. 524.) For further proofs, see Buddeus: Isagoge historico-theologica ad
theologiam universam , Lpz ., i72o > //, 4: “De theologia morali simulque de
theologia mystica itemque jurisprudentia divina et prudentia turn Christiana
turn pastorali.” Even this title shows the variety of the contents; the retro-
spective survey of the history of the Lutheran ethic (pp. 692-672) emphasizes it
expressly and lan^cnts that there is no systematic treatment of the subject,
although Luther and Melancthon were supposed to have renewed all the
subject-matter of ethics. To that then comes in addition the “theologia con-
scientiaria”, or casuistry ( p . 616), about whose connection with the Lutheran
practice of confession (which had to differentiate between the sins which led
to loss of grace and those which did not lead to it) Hupfeld makes a very
instructive contribution to the subject. Also on this side there is an analogy
with the Catholic ethic: the ecclesiastical ethic can only hold together the
heterogeneous elements which it contains by means of casuistry and the
confessional in spite of its Protestant autonomy and emphasis upon inwardness.
Something similar is revealed by the Calvinistic system of Church discipline.
The difference lies merely in the absence of the legal binding nature of the
verdict ; see the statement by Gass , //, /, p. 197, on Balduin: Tractatus toti rei
publicae utilis sive de casibus conscientiae , 1628. 1 here give the outline of the material
according to B. (1) The real philosophical ethic in the Aristotelian sense is
occupied with questions of the virtues, temperaments, etc., all of which is
absorbed into the Christian central virtue of love ; see Luthardt: Compendium ,
122-169 . (2) The other part of ethics is the doctrine of Natural Law: “Altera
philosophiae practicae pars seu jurisprudentia naturalis de officiis hominum
legibusque divinis, quibus ilia diriguntur, praecipit.” For the second section
the main authority is Cicero, while Aristotle, it is true, “ad vitae civilis usum
unice accommodatus est”, but “prudentiae potius quam obligationis legumque
divinorum habuit rationem” ( p . 308). The Church Fathers combine this
Natural Law with revelation, the Schoolmen mingled Aristotle, the jus civile
and the jus canonicum in a confused way. Melancthon, Benedict Winkler, and
others then restored the right relationship. Finally, Fal. Alberti , in his Com-
pendium juris naturae orthodoxae theologiae conformatum , whom the jurists Dav.
Menius and Veit Lud. v. Seckendorf followed, deduced the Natural Law
from the Primitive State, only in so doing they did not lay sufficient emphasis
upon the special conditions and modifications produced by the Fall. In any
case, it is “praestantissima philosophiae practicae pars, quae vel maxime vitae
civilis negotiis inservire debet (p . 344 )”. (3) The third part of ethics is the
real Politica, the doctrine of the effectuation of civil welfare in all classes and
callings: “eo magis ilia tractatio est necessaria, quo amplius ejus est usus,
856 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
siquidem non tantum prudentiae civilis et aulicae, sed et christianae et
theologicae et ecclesiasticae principia et fundamenta ex ea petenda sunt”
(P- 3 J 7 )‘ Here also there is a large literature which only in more recent times
as “politica sive prudentia civilis” has become clearly defined in relation to
the doctrine of the universal Law of Nature, which in earlier days was to a
great extent mingled together with it. The primitive form of this “Prudentia
civilis” is the Mosaic Law, “omnes enim istae leges aequitati naturali sunt
consentaneae” ( p . 4/p) ; then the Wisdom literature of the Old Testament which
had “prudentiam non minus quam ad doctrinam moralem seu vitam recte
instituendam spectant” ( p . 320). The results have been put together by the
well-known theologian Dannhauer, in a Politica biblica. Further, Aristotle has to
be considered ; it is, however, felt that he is not quite sufficient to meet the
requirements of the present day ; after that there follow notes on more recent
literature on politics and State administration, among whom Bodin and
Machiavelli, who exaggerates the rights of princes, must not be overlooked.
To this belongs also political economy whose connection with the Christian
class state and the Natural Law is shown by Roscher: Geschichte der Nationaloko -
nomik. Buddeus names above all Seckendorff’s Christian State: “de omnium
ordinum emendatione secundum indolem disciplinae Chrfetinae praecipit”
( p . 721). (4) Above these three or four sections of practical theology there then
rises the real theologia moralis , the doctrine of the motus spirituales y or the theologia
moralis mystica , whereby this mysticism is only permissible if it is pure, that is,
if it is based upon faith in the Atonement and faith in the Bible : “Per theologiam
mysticam, puram scilicet, nihil aliud intelligi quam ipsam theologiam moralem
stricte sic dictam quemlibet potest docere collatio. Mysticam namque theologiam
ita nonnulli definire solent, quod sit divina et arcana de Deo rebusque divinis
sapientia, qua mens hominis regeniti illuminetur, voluntas virtutibus divinis
instructa ab inquinamentis peccatorum purgetur, ut ilia cum Deo arctissime
uniatur. Id vero est, quorsum et theologia moralis tendit” ( p . 672). The books
by Alberti , Dannhauer , and others I have unfortunately been unable to read.
242 (p.529.) Cf. on this point K. Kohler: Luther und die Juris ten, 1873; E. Branden-
burg: M. L.s Anschauung vom Staate und der Gesellschaft , igor {Schriften d. Vereins
f. Ref-Gesch., 70); G. Muller: Luthers Stellung zum Rechte ( Schriften des evang.
Bundes, 43-44), igo6 ; E. Ehrhardt: La nature du droit naturel chez Luther , F^tschrift
der Pariser Fakultat fur Montauban; Cardauns: Lehre vom Wider standsrecht im Luther -
turn und Calvinismus, Bonner Diss., 1903. — Bluntschli: Gesch . d. allgemeinen Staats -
rechtes und der Politik , 1864 , pp. 46-60 , does not penetrate deeply enough into the
subject; he makes certain criticisms which to some extent are in touch with
modern liberal criticism. Bergbohm: Jurisprudenz und Rechtsphilosophie, 1892,
a radical criticism of all Natural Law from a purely legal Positivistic standpoint
has neither knowledge nor understanding of the ecclesiastical Natural Law,
and speaks especially of the Natural Law of the Reformers (p. 139) with complete
ignorance of the subject. Hinrichs: Geschichte der Rechts und Staatsprinzipien seit der
Ref I, 1848, gives little about Luther, more about Melanchton and orthodoxy.
248 (p. 529.) Here is the radical difference from Occam’s Natural Law,
Ehrhardt , 304. Cf., for example, the “exhortation to peace in reply to the
Twelve Articles of the peasants” : “So there is the Natural Law which governs
the whole world, that no one may be his own judge nor revenge himself”
(B. A., IV, 1, p. 319). “Can ye not think that if your demand were right each
man would judge the other, and there would be no longer any authority or
government, order or law in the world, but simply murder and the shedding
of blood . . . ? Now it is said of the common Divine and Natural Law that
PROTESTANTISM
857
even the heathen, the Turks and the Jews, must keep it, if order and peace in
the world is to remain” (p. 321). “You are going beyond God, and taking
away from the government its authority and its rights, and indeed all that
it has. For of what use is the government if it has lost its authority? .... In
authority consists all its wealth and all its life” {p. 320). Still more clearly
in the pamphlet Ob Kriegsleute auch in seligem Stand sein konnen , 1326. So also
in the modern Lutheran ethic, cf. von Hofmann : “As a member of the State the
Christian is obliged, by means of that which the legal order offers, to maintain
his own rights against their abuse by the official ruler. When this is out of the
question, then only one of two things is morally possible, either to endure
compulsion or to exchange this State for another” (p. 278, see also p. 273 ).
248 (P* 53 2 *) Figgis: From Gerson to Grotius , pp. 62-107 , places Luther with
Machiavelli. Buddeus: Isagoge , 323 , sees in Lutheranism the right mean between
followers of Machiavelli and the Monarchomachi (opponents of monarchy) :
“quorum illi imperantibus plus quam decet coneedunt, hi plus quam decet
adimunt”. He also finds in Bodin relative truths ; the related elements in the
view of Hobbes on the contrary seem to have been nowhere recognized ; only
Pufendorf, who in many respects had a Lutheran way of thinking (see Bluntschli ,
p. 130 f; Lezius: mToleranzbegrijf Lockes und Pufendorf s , igoo , pp. 38 and 68), has
noticed this; see Bluntschli , 121 . — These ideas of Lutheran Natural Law are
those which lie entirely at the basis of the legal philosophy of F. J. Stahl, and
in Stahl they experience their first comprehensive and otherwise very able
philosophical basis; cf. the instructive analysis of Stahl in E. Kaufmann: Studien
zur Staatslehre des monarchischen Prinzips, Hallenser Diss ., igo6. The connection
with Luther is carried out right into details : the Government and authority
a power that has been absolutely given and set over individuals ( p . 79) ; the
social institutions, the family, property, the State, based in the Divine Will and
not in immanental necessity, but appointed with the Creation and with Nature
working themselves out along their own naturally reasonable laws {p. 82) ;
law is ethical even in its transformation into an external compulsory authority
which has been effected by the Fall ( p . 83 ) ; the State and Society limited to
the working out of the purposes of well-being and order within the world for
which authority and order is necessary, in that, however, it is quite independent
and no£ influenced by revelation ( p . gf) ; the source of natural Reason is
equally the source of the Divine power and appointment ( p . 94). All those
statements are purely Lutheran; it is the Natural Law “of irrationalism”, as
Kaufmann rightly sets it over against the Natural Law of Rationalism ; only
Kaufmann in a quite erroneous conception of Luther as a representative of
modern autonomous individualism has not recognized this connection {p. gg).
The special factor in time and in history for Stahl is solely the intensification
of the “irrational Natural Law” exactly towards the legitimist monarchy for
which Luther felt no necessity. Princes or magistrates were all the same to
him. — It is from this point of view that we can understand right down to the
present day the politics of Conservatives who combine a policy of dominion
with all the consequences of the thought of power with a Christian piety
which is restricted to the inward life of the spirit and temper, and who maintain
an ethical connection between the two separate spheres only by means of
the theory of the patriarchal relationship of authority and respect, which
should subsist between those who rule and those who are ruled. Cf. the demand
of Stahl quoted by Kaufmann ( p . g6) : “Thou ought not to break this con-
nection without reason (with the authority that has come into existence
historically), thou must have reverence for that which God has either ordained
858 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
or permitted to take place ; thou shalt not merely obey the Government where
such exists but thou shalt yield faithfulness and affection to the dynasty
which is rooted in history.* * Otherwise the existence alongside of each other
of a policy of force, which includes all kinds of harshness, of a system of power
which has to be established legally, and of a love ethic which believes in
Providence, the result of sin, in which then all that is left over is to protect as
far as possible the positive law and authority and a compromise in which the
love ethic keeps the abstract doctrinaire spirit in the background. — Also in
Bismarck the striking phenomenon of his policy of force, and his Christian
piety which existed alongside of each other, can only be understood if one
understands the ideas of that Lutheran and Stahl principle of the '‘Natural
Law of irrationalism” alongside of a Christian piety which was entirely
untouched by it; in the Calvinistic and sectarian Cromwell, and also in
Gladstone and Lincoln, a position of this kind would have been quite impossible.
For this separation between an external policy of force and an inward piety of
feeling Bismarck liked to appeal to Luther; see Lenz: Bismarcks Religion ( Ausgew .
Vortrage und Aufsatze, deutsche Bucher ei Nr. 18), Art. Bismarck in Religion in
Geschichte und Gegenwart; Meinecke: B. s. Eintritt in den christlich-germanischen
Kreis H. £., 1902; 0 . Baumgarten , B. s. Stellung zu Religion t snd Kirche, 1900;
now, above all, E. Marcks: Bismarck , I, 1910. The impression of Bismarck’s
political thought upon German Christian piety has been extraordinary even
down to the present day ; but the glorification of force which has been rendered
necessary by sin, with the withdrawal of the Christian ethic more to private
relationships, is not only a peculiarity of the Prussian religion of the present
day, even though it is only here that it has gained an enthusiastic acceptance
as something quite natural which was alien to Luther’s ideas and for other
reasons also to those of Bismarck.
247 (p. 532.) Cf. the expression of opinion in the Kreuzzeitung on the
aristocratic selection-theories of the well-known evolutionist sociologist
Otto Ammon : “The weakness of the doctrine of the Blue and Red democracies
cannot be represented more strikingly than in this book” ; they are results
“against which even from a strictly conservative standpoint there is nothing
to be said” ; see Stillich : Die politischen Parteien in Deutschland , /, Die Konservativen ,
p . 32; appeal of the Kreuzztitung to Machiavelli’s theory of Power, p. 5# v Or see
the statement in the Conservative election programme of 1849: “The Con-
servative candidate must be a political man. He must know that force in the
life of a State is an eternally effective factor, and that it (although in itself
unreasonable) may always be used if it produces that which is reasonable,
as is proved by its being a fundamental condition of the life of the State”
(Stillich, p. 218).
250 (p. 534.) Cf. the section in Stillich: Die Rechtsauffassung der Konservativen ,
pp. 161-178. The inequality of law according to differences of class and the
justice which takes account of the conditions of the time in contrast to the
abstract equality before the law (p. 166). A mad example of Kadi justice is the
verdict of the Duke Charles of Burgundy in von weltl. Obrigkeit , IV, 1, p. 272,
to which Luther appeals: “A knight who engages the affections of the wife
of his enemy and promises her that he will spare the life of her husband, and
then, in spite of that, kills his enemy, is condemned to take the woman to
wife, and then after the bridal night he is unexpectedly beheaded, and all his
goods are given to the lady. See how such a judgment is freely due to reason,
and goes so far beyond the law of all books that everyone must acknowledge its
justice and find in his own heart that it is right.”
PROTESTANTISM
659
251 (p* 535*) For the foundation of institutions in God and the meaning of
this foundation, see Ehrhardt , p. 303. It is always meant indirectly. How this
is understood is shown by the fact that Luther held that the Holy Roman
Empire was appointed, that is, founded, by God, although Luther held that
the translatio imperii by the Pope was a piece of trickery; W. Kohler: Luthers
Schrift an den Adel , 1895, p. 242. “Starting from the idea of the absolute and
unlimited arbitrariness of God . . . Luther recognizes in the Pope’s action a
Divine intention, he places the Pope’s action under the guidance of God,
seeing in the Pope the mechanical instrument of the Divine and Almighty
Will.” Thus Professor Suchsland explains the Conservative theories of authority
in the State, in morality, in law, in marriage, absolutely from the strictly
scientific standpoint, that is, on the presupposition of the principle of selection;
the theory of a “Divine appointment” is then held to be merely the transcendent
dogmatic element of faith which is only something additional ( Stillich , p. 33).
262 (P* 535-) On this point cf. Corpus Ref., XXI u. XVI; also Kohler: Luther
und die Juristen , pp. 100-103; Troeltsch: Gerhard und Melancthon; Ellinger: Melanc-
thon, 1902 , pp. 583-383; here his tendency to the aristocracy of the towns, just
as it was with Erasmus; very good rendering in Hdnel: Mel., der Jurist (£./.
Rechtsgeschichte, hg. v. Rudorjf, VIII, 1869). The following passage is relevant:
“His standpoint is that of Scholasticism, in spite of his aversion to it, and that
which in all his writings distinguishes him from the Scholastic writers is neither
a greater precision in the definition of ideas nor a more independent and free
method, neither new and fruitful ideas, nor even merely a deeper utilization
of Aristotle, but solely the popularization of the subject-matter, the attempt
to bring the philosophic way of thinking nearer to life, and naturally, above all,
the altered view of the relation between Church and State” {p. 263). Only the
doctrine of non-resistance must still be emphasized, as H. himself says in
another place: “Behind the political ideas there are independent and peculiar
conceptions and principles, as, for instance, especially, that man is created
for Society, and that in Society conditions of authority and submission obtain
which must be recognized and logically developed. But they are conceptions
and principles which are Divinely implanted. It is this which makes the State
a Divine institution. . . . The existing State and the existing law are Divine
even when they are oppressive and stifle freedom ; even a Divinely appointed
and unbelieving ruler must be respected in his rights as a scourge of God.
Every self-willed and thoughtless alteration in the constitution and in the
laws must be rejected; even departures from Reason must be tolerated, so
long as they do not go wholly against Nature and then spoil it” (p. 260). Then,
how under the influence of the problems which faced the Schmalkald League,
Melancthon and Luther recognized the right of resistance, and incidentally
adopted the Rationalistic individualistic conception of the Law of Nature,
is shown by Cardauns, pp. 14-19 ; here, incidentally, are the preparatory stages
of Calvin’s doctrine. Unfortunately, Cardauns does not show how these doctrines
disappeared from Lutheranism ; their disappearance was probably connected
with the general “Fundamentalist-Lutheran” reaction, and the reactionary
propaganda which emanated from Saxony, through which, then, the forces
which made for reform and progress were driven into Calvinism. In later
Lutheranism the problem of resistance centres chiefly round the problem of
the relation between the territorial lords and the Imperial power, in which a
strictly Imperial and Conservative party stood in opposition to a Calvinistically
influenced party, which was much freer and which centred in Jena; see Stintzing:
Geschichte der deutschen Rechtswissenschaft , II, 1884, pp. 40-54. — The gradual
860 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
decline of the liberal conception of Natural Law in the School of Melancthon,
see v. Kaltenborn: Vorldufer des Hugo Grotius , 1848.
862a (P- 537*) Cf. Cardauns , p . 13: at the beginning Melancthon follows the
opinions of Luther; then, however, he shows “in opposition to Luther from the
beginning, not only under the influence of external happenings”, his preference
for class control of the ruling power. Cardauns points out his preference for
Ph. de Commyncs (for the latter, ibid.,p. 30, and Baudrillart : Bodin , 1833, pp. 10-
15), also echoes of the Erasmian doctrine of the State, Cardauns , pp. 31 ff. —
For the connection between his hatred of the non-Sacramentarians and his
aversion to a republic, see von Schubert: Bundnis und Bekenntnis , 1323-30, 1308,
p. 3; M. s. Schule v. Hinrichs , 1 .
* 58 (P- 537*) Cf. Stintzing: Geschichte der deutschen Rechtswissenschaft , 1 , 1880. Very
characteristic here is the deduction of the jurist Konrad Lagus (pp. 302ff.) :
distinction between the jus naturale primaevum and the jus naturale secundarium ,
the latter “granted to man by the grace of God against his corrupt nature”.
“The law which flows from that the Romans call jus gentium because it is
observed among all peoples. It is also called jus divinum. The Calvinists are
wrong when they restrict this term to the standard laid down in the Gospel.
For there are many leges vere divinae which are expressed neither in the Gospel
nor in the Mosaic Law. The jus divinum is everything which corresponds to the
Will of Christ and which purely human Reason requires for the protection of
the existence of human society. This jus naturale has several degrees which are
given in the Decalogue (by the distinction between the First and the Second
Table). Its commandments — and, it is true, both those of the First and
of the Second Table — can be inferred from human nature and Reason. Only,
since the impulses of the sinful nature of man are so powerful that he often acts
against the judicium naturale , it is not sufficient to leave obedience simply to his
good-will. That is why it became necessary to invent other legum carceres in
order to force men by public authority to obedience. These reflections lead to
the positive law jus civile , “quod publica necessitate exigente civium suffragio ( !)
in aliqua re publica constituitur”. In Kling, I, 307, we find the same con-
clusions and the same way of treating the conceptions jus naturale primaevum
and jus naturale secundarium as technical conceptions. It means the same thing
that I have distinguished all through this book as the difference between the
“absolute” and “relative” Natural Law. It is just the same in the standard
jurist, Joh. Oldendorp, /, p. 371 : the jus naturale secundarium is said to be gathered
up in the Decalogue as a means against sin ; thence it was taken over into the
Roman Twelve Tables which the Romans are supposed to have learned from
the Greeks, and the Greeks from the Hebrews. It is only with the aid of
these examples that we see clearly into the meaning of the thought of early
Lutheranism.
854 (P- 538-) For the details, see in Stintzing , II; the doctrines of the theologians
of the seventeenth century, in Schmidt: Ev.-Luth. Dogmatik, 433 ff.; Hollaz:
“Causa efficiens principalis magistratus est Deus triunus, qui certis personis
officium magistratus committit vel immediate (Exod. iff. 10; Num. xxvii. 18;
1 Sam. ix. 15) vel mediate (John xix. 1 1) . . . Hodie ad officium magistratus
personae habiles moderante Deo legitime perveniunt vel per electionem vel
per successionem vel per justam occupationem.” J. Gerhard: “Magistratum
potestate aliqua instructum esse pater ex Rom. xiii. 1. . . . Potestas ilia magis-
tratus non est absoluta, illimitata et indeterminata, sed ad leges et normam
superioris alicujus potestatis restricta. Cum enim potestatem suam a Deo
magistratus accepcrit, ideo Deum superiorem recognoscere et illius voluntati
PROTESTANTISM
86 1
ac legibus in usu hujus potestatis scse conformare tenetur. . • . Quando ergo
politici absolutam potestatem [that is, Bodin’s doctrine] summo magistratui
tribuunt, id non est accipiendum simpliciter nec respectu superioris sc. Dei,
sed duiiitaxat respectu inferiorum magistratuum [this is in direct opposition
to the main doctrine of Calvinism] . . . Propter peccatum protoplastorum
non solum spiritualibus et aeternis futurac vitae bonis, sed etiam corporalibus
et externis hujus vitae commodis genus humanum excidit. Sed Deus ex miranda
et nunquam satis praedicanda benignitate propter filii intercessionem non
ilia solum sed etiam haec restituit ac reparavit ac media illis conservandis
ordinavit. . . . Per magistratum politicum Deus conscrvat pacem et tran-
quillitatem externam, administrat justitiam civilem, defendit facultates,
famam et corpora.” All this takes place through the Natural Law of Reason,
only the later doctrine emphasizes mainly the Divine appointment of the
existing order; upon this a jurisprudence which works up the empirical law
material then bases itself, without caring very much about the theoretically
asserted deduction from the Natural Law and Reason. — The doctrine of the
jurists is summarized by Reinking : “The fundamental idea of his political
convictions is the (mediated) Divine appointment of all authorities. He who
attacks it breaks feith and is disobedient, and must expect to be punished by
God, even when in extreme cases the resistance can be excused, i.e. when it is
exercised against a prince who by despising the fundamental laws and by legal
violence has become a ‘tyrant* (here, too, this is a relic of Natural Law
Rationalist individualism!). To him the best of all forms of governments
seems to be that of monarchy, because it is the most ancient and the most
natural order, which most easily preserves peace, and which most nearly
resembles the Divine government of the world’* ( Stintzing , II, igy). In matters
affecting the law of the Empire, R. takes the Imperial standpoint ; the Empire
is the fourth world monarchy of the Book of Daniel, which will last for ever.
Authorities are the Roman law, and the law of feudalism, and the mediaeval
jurists. “i?.’s work is interwoven with every fibre in the traditions of the Middle
Ages so far as his decided Protestantism has not freed him** ( p . igg). The
opposing modern school of Arumaus and Limaeus, which was influenced by
the Netherlands and by Calvinism, seems (according to Stintzing* s illustrations)
to have had modern ideas only in reference to the Imperial law. The analogous
development in Catholic Absolutism (not, however, among the juridical
philosophers), see Kaufmann , pp. i6ff. , and in Bossuet's Politique Tirie de V Venture,
iyog; in English Absolutism similar conclusions in Filmer's Patriarcha , 1680.
The Law of Nature only became suspect to orthodox Lutherans after the
Natural Law of Grotius had emancipated it from theology ; see Stintzing , //, isg;
over against that Reinking writes a Biblische Polizei , d. i. gewisse aus heiliger
gottlicher Schrift zusammengebrachte, auf die drei Hauptstdnde , als geist lie hen, weltlichen,
hduslichen , gerichtete Axiomata, Frankfurt , 1653; the large number of editions proves
that the book found deserved acceptance {Stintzing, II, soyjff Similar in
spirit is Seckendorff’s Deutscher Furstenstaat, 1655, and Christenstaat, 1685. — For the
relation of Grotius and Pufendorf to these ecclesiastical schools of thought, see
Bluntschli und Hinrichs, for Masius, see Bluntschli, p. 184.
* 65 (p* 539*) On this cf. Roscher: Geschichte der Nationalokonomik in Deutschland,
i8y4 . In spite of the opinion that the Reformation really constituted a renewal
of economic thought as well, R. recognizes its purely Scholastic character
(in this respect) in his description of both the main representatives of the
Lutheran doctrine of Society; Melchior von Ossa (died 1557) and L. von Secken-
dorff (died 1692): “Our friend Ossa stands likewise with one foot in the
862 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
theological period of political economy, and with the other in the juridical
period. Besides the Bible, the Church Fathers, and Aristotle he quotes chiefly
from the Corpora Juris ”, p . 7/5. That the latter is not in opposition to the
Christian Natural Law has already been shown, and is also proved by the title of
the main section of the work by Ossa: “ Von Gottseliger , weisslichen , vernunftigen und
rechtmassigen Regierung und Institution ”. Here the identification of the Bible,
Reason, and law are distinctly expressed. The description of von Seckendorff
is similar: “That theological, or at least religious, colour of the science of the
State and political economy, which the Reformation had not only retained
from the Scholastic period, but had also considerably warmed and deepened,
was quickly disappearing among S.'s contemporaries” {p. 240). On the
development from the first to the second, see p. 252: the Prince becomes
from a patrimonial lord a new head of the State; in spite of all the piety
of the time, political science and the system of political economy “became,
to a great extent, emancipated from the whole admixture of theology and
jurisprudence”; only then did political science and political economy go
beyond aphorisms and become systematic sciences. For the way in which the
Church was hampered, and for the use of Scriptural examples for doctrines
of Reason, even among authors of a modern outlook, see’the remarks on
Obrecht , p. 152. The main interest was concerned with the preservation of the
system of the division of classes, which was also served by the ordinances about
dress, and to some extent by the laws about luxury (pp. ug , 727 , 727 ff. 247) ;
it has been instituted by God like the State itself, to whose conception it
belongs. The second main interest is the increase of the power of the territorial
lord, who, however, remains bound in the patriarchal manner to Natural
and Divine Law, and may not rule in the Machiavellian fashion {pp. io6 t
7 2gff. y 204). — For the theologians the whole is a concern of the authorities,
who in so doing have to behave according to the Natural Law and the Divine
Law, as the appointed organ for the working out of that which was suitable ;
thus Hutter: “Praecipua officia magistratus politici sunt: (1) curam gerere
utriusque tabulae decalogi, quod ad externam disciplinam attinet, (2) ferre
leges de negotiis civilibus et oeconomicis consentaneas juri divino et naturali ;
(3) sedulo providere, ut leges promulgatae veniant in executionem ; (4) delin-
quentibus pro qualitate delicti poenas irrogare, obedientes fovere et p~aemiis
afficere”; or Hollaz' “Magistratus civilis est ordinatus ad bonum publicum
idque quadruplex : ( 1 ) ecclesiasticum, cum reges nutritii ecclesiae et episcopi
extra templum; (2) civile, dum civium commoda tuetur et hostes externos
finibus patriae propulsat; (3) morale, quatenus honestas praescribit leges,
quibus subditi in officio continentur, ut vitam tranquillam agant in pietate et
honestate (1 Tim. ii. 2); (4) naturale, quo imperantes prospiciant subditis
de commeatu et aliis necessariis instar Pharaonis (Gen. xli. 34)”. Schmidt:
Dogmatiky 460. For the special nature of the content of the economic Natural
Law, see further below. For the relation between the growing modern political
economy and its individualistic rationalistic hedonistic character to that of
the ecclesiastical Law of Nature, see Oncken: Geschichte der Nationaldkonomie y
/, 7,902.
,## (p* 542.) This fundamental theory finds its classic expression in Luther’s
Greater Catechism : it is the duty of the individual to submit to the existing
institutions as in the “media per creaturas bona percipiendi”. For “creaturae
tantum manus sunt, canales, media et organa, quorum opera et adminiculo
Deus omnia largitur hominibus. . . . Quam ob rem et haec edia [namely,
parents, authorities, and the general relationships between one man and
PROTESTANTISM
863
another] . . . non sunt respuenda neque temeraria praesumtione aliae rationes
et viae investigandae, quam Deiis praecipit”. Thus parents, governments, and
Christian fellow-men have received their task from God in their post which
has been given them by Nature, “ut omnis generis officia nobis ostendant et
exhibeant adeo, ut haec non ab illis, sed per illos a Deo peculiariter accipiamus”.
(Symb. Bd. ed. Muller, p. 390). The most important commandment among those
which relate to human relationships, that is, of the Second Table, is the fourth :
“thou shalt honour thy father and thy mother” ( p . 403). At first this position
of the family is described in its immediate significance, but as the highest
ideal of sociological relations: “Hunc parentum statum et ordinem Deus
praeciptfe hoc ornavit elogio ante omnes, qui sub ipso sunt, status et ordines,
ut non simpliciter praecipiat parentes esse amandos, sed honorandos. . . .
Est enim honor res amore multis modis sublimior, utpote quae non tantum
amorem in se complectatur, verum etiam singularem quandam modestiam,
humilitatem et reverentiam, quae cuiquam quasi majestati hie occultae
habenda sit” ( p . 406). But this fundamental theory covers all kinds of authority,
and since differences of authority, owing to the inequality among men, are
everywhere present, it finally covers all relationships in general: “In hujus
praecepti explaaatione neque illud praetereundum est, quod ad multiplicem
obedientiam superiorum attinet, nempe eorum, qui versantur in imperio et
rei publicae procurationem sustinent. Si quidem e parentum potestate omnes
aliae propagantur et manant.” Thus there follow the relations to authorities,
to which, of course, the local authorities and the lords of the manor belong ;
then teachers of all kinds, and the pastors, then the neighbours, and finally
employers of labour and servants, “ita, ut omnes, quotquot domini appellatione
censentur, vice parentum sint ab iisdemque potestatem ac vim regnandi
accipiant. Unde quoque secundum Scripturam omnes dicuntur patres, utpote
qui in sua gubernatione officium patris obire ergaque subditos patris animum
inducere debeant. Quemadmodum et olim apud Romanos et alios plerosque
populos heros herasque patres et matresfamilias nominabant. Ita quoque suos
magistratus et principes dixerunt patres patriae, nobis Christianis in dedecus
et ignominiam” (p. 412/.). This implies the duty of care for others on the
part of parents and masters : “Neque enim Dei voluntas est, ut aut perditi
nebulopes aut enormes tyranni hujus officii procurationem obeant . . ., sed
cogitent potius, quod et ipsi Deo obedientiam debeant, ut officium suae fidei
delegatum ipsis curae sit ac sollicitudini utque liberos, familiam et subditos
suos non tantum nutriant et corporalibus alimentis provideant, sed omnium
maxime ad laudem et gloriam Dei propagandam educant” ( p . 417). Certainly
it is generally true : “erga fratres, sorores et proximum in genere nihil amplius
(Deus) praecipit quam amore prosequendos esse” (/>. 106) ; after that, however,
follows the statement that it is a much higher thing to honour than to love, and
in the general graded character of all conditions (coram Deo omnes quidem
pares sumus, sed nos inter nos hoc dispari et ordinato discrimine non possumus
non discrepare, 406) love everywhere is mingled with elements of authority
and subordination, and everywhere it is replaced by grateful humility or a
paternal authority.— Just as classically formulated is this fundamental theory
with its religious basis within the modern Lutheran ethic by von Hofmann :
“Our assistance to the world is conservative. The humility of our love to the
world excludes all arbitrary action” (pp. 136 ff .) ; see also Stillich , p. 89: “The
preparation for the social organization of Society desired by the Conservatives
is that of the family. The latter”, says the venerable leader of the Saxon
Conservatives, Freiherr v. Friesen , “purposes the harmonious co-operation of all
864 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the individual members in a definite whole, whereas the bureaucratic (that is,
the modern) State, in the principle of equality, destroys that which was
originally equal, for its own special purpose, and the individual atoms which
it thus gains it forces violently into its own scheme.* * Even down to the present
day these are the fundamental sociological features of the world-outlook among
the Conservatives, so far as their policy is a policy of a world-outlook at all.
It is, however, also clear that this view is closely connected with an anti-
individualistic immobilized general situation in politics and economics, and
that an urban mobile individualistic and capitalistic civilization would need
different ethical and religious convictions. That the difficulties of the Lutheran
Catechism lie in ethics still more than in dogma every pastor knows who
works in great cities and among working-class communities. It represents a
fundamental theory of sociological questions which cannot be carried out in
our modern city civilization. On this point cf. Traub: Ethik und Kapitalismus a ,
*907-
268 (p* 547 *) 0 ° this point see J. Kostlin: Luthers Theologie 2 , i88j , p. 482 :
“Luther defines marriage as ‘conjunctio unius maris et unius feminae insepara-
bilis, non tantum juris naturae as the Canonists express it : sed ctiam voluntatis
ct voluptatis, ut ita dicam, divinae*. Its purpose or its cau\a Jinalis he sees in
the procreation of children, in the procreatio sobolis . Before the Fall it had
already been instituted as a means of providing the Church and the State
with useful members. ‘Thus marriage and the household are not merely
fons et origo generis humani , but at the same time they ought to serve as paratio
ecclesiae and become fons rei publicae .* After the Fall it also serves the purpose
as a remedy against lust and a check to its sinful outbreaks. Indeed, he now
describes this as primus finis , whereas otherwise the original purpose remains
finis magis principalis. Thus in his mind that desire still retains its sinful character,
but ‘approbatio et beneplacitum Dei tegit miseram turpitudinem libidinis et
removet iram Dei imminentem illi concupiscentiaeV* — The inner nature of
marriage itself Luther explains very beautifully in the Greater Catechism, in
the exposition of the Sixth Commandment, particularly at the end, where he
is dealing with the subject of “chastity” within marriage : “Ubi enim volumus
conjugali castitati locum esse, ibi necessum est ante omnia, ut vir et mulier
in amore Concordes conversentur, ut alter alterum ex animo mutua c^uandam
benevolentia et fide complectatur. Quod si praesto fuerit, ipsa quoque castitas
sua sponte sine mandato consequetur” ( Muller , 426). In addition, cf. Wald.
Kawerau: Die Ref. und die Ehe , 1892 ( V . f Ref.-Gesch ., Nr. 39); Marianne Weber:
Ehefrau und Mutter y pp. 282-289; here it is rightly pointed out that “the new
ideal of womanhood which lays the chief stress upon the moral qualities of the
house-mother, on love and loyalty, on the fear of God and trusting God, on
reliability and honesty** ( Kawerau , 7/), has been strongly influenced by the
ideals of the Book of Ecclesiasticus ; further, cf. Rade: Stellung des Christentums zum
Geschlechtsleben ( Rel . Volksbb ., V 7/8) , 1910; a collection of the most important
passages in W. Walter: Fur Luther wider Rom y 1906. For the view of the matter
as it affects economics and the theory of population, see Roscher: Geschichte der
Nationalokonomik, pp. 57-59. For concupiscence, see Braun: Luthers Lehre von der
Konkupisztnz . This, however, is not simply a relic of the Catholic and monastic
system ; the thought lies much more in the system, as we shall see in similar
ideas on the State and work. In the dry definitions of the later Lutheran Schol-
astic thinkers ( Schmidt , Dogmatik , 461-465) , this feature disappears, but only
behind the positive character of the command. Luther’s “relics of Catholicism”
are connected with the early Christian opposition between the world and
PROTESTANTISM
865
salvation, and they concern essential problems of Christian thought, as indeed
the problem of sex relations undoubtedly is. — For Luther’s pessimism about
actual conditions, see G. Kat : “Quoniam vero apud nos adeo foeda et nefanda
omnium vitiorum et scortationum lerna cernitur, hoc praeceptum quoque
ad versus omnia impudicitiae genera et species constitutum est. . . . Tantum
ergo hoc praeceptuma nobis exigit, ut quisque turn pro se vitam castam agat,
turn proximo quoque in hoc obinenda et tuenda sit auxilio” ( Muller , 423 ). —
Rode , p, 5/, says : “The transference of the chief emphasis to the inmost centre
of personality and the proclamation of Christian freedom which sprang out
of that was bound to have as a result a complete change of judgment about
the external processes of the life of sex. And we can only regard it as a relic
of Augustinian and Catholic tradition that still under the influence of Luther’s
example in the Protestant Church the universality of human sin was attributed
to the sex origin of each individual.” This deduction, which is certainly possible
from the logical point of view, from the principle of Christian freedom, was,
however, not made by Luther. The life of sex and erotic love are precisely not
gifts of God with their own beauty to be freely used and shaped, but they are
simply a tribute paid to Nature, which the Christian can and ought to make
a means for the exercise of the love of one’s neighbour. Naturally, the pre-
suppositions which determine our point of view, namely, the biological con-
ception of “lust” and the poetic glorification of eroticism, do not exist for
Luther ; with him, rather, the predominant idea is the doctrine of lust as a
result of the Fall.
269 (P- 548.) On this point cf. Kostlin: Theologie Luthers , //, 485-490 , 553-564;
J. Kostlin: Staat , Recht und Kirche und die ev. Ethik , Stud. u. Kritt., 1877; Branden-
burg: Lds Anschauungen von Staat und Gesellschaft ; Lenz : Luthers Lehre von der
Obrigkeit ( Preuss . Jahrbb., 75, 1894); Jdger: Politische Ideen L.’s und ihr Einfluss
auf die innere Entwickelung Deutschlands ( Preuss . Jahrbb ., 1903); K. Kdhler: Luther
und die Juristen. Lenz pays too little attention to the connection with the mediaeval
world of thought, and connects the modern State too directly with Luther’s
ideas ; Brandenburg rightly emphasizes the former, but undervalues the positive
value of Reason and the Divine appointment of the State, which certainly only
comes out in Luther later on. Gottfried Arnold: Unparteyische Kirchen- und Ketzer -
historic, 1700, II, 11 and 12 , 18-28 , represents Luther’s politics with an emphasis
on the features of detachment from the world; the newest is Karl Muller: Kirche ,
Gemeinde, und weltliche Obrigkeit nach Luther , Christl. Welt , 1910; the question of
the State is, however, scarcely mentioned in this book.
260 (p* 55 1 *) Cf. the tractate Ob Kriegsleute auch in seligem Stand sein konnen ,
1526 , and Vom Krieg wider die Tiirken , 1529. Here again the Old Testament
has to be drawn in so as to justify a not really Christian idea. Later, of course,
Luther thought less harshly, and perhaps also less logically, about these things ;
see Cardauns , pp. 1-17. But upon the whole the particularism and the rejection
of a policy of intervention is amain feature of genuine Lutheranism, as the works
of Schubert which have been mentioned show. On problems of war and
treaties, see above all Hortleder: Handlungen und Ausschreiben von Rechtmdssigkeit
des deutschen Krieges, Gotha , 1617 und 1618 , where the material is collected,
especially II; see here the discussion by Ratzenberger , who argues that Melanc-
thon, Jonas, Bugenhagen, Menius, etc., had fallen away from Luther’s pure
doctrine of resistance (p. 39 ), also Theolog. Jahresbericht , XXVIII , p. 460 , on
Schweizer: Der Donaufeldzug von 1546.
161 (p. 552.) Lenz gives it as his opinion: “In this double relationship of a
Christian government in its negative function of preserving peace, maintaining
vol. n. DD
866 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
law, and furthering material interests, and in its positive duty to secure peace,
I believe, lies the solution of the much discussed problem, and of the harmony
which is lacking in the life and doctrine of the Reformer. . . . Two kingdoms,
both founded by God, are spread throughout the world, the creature and the
Gospel, indivisible in every Christian, and yet theoretically to be kept separate
like soul and body, idea and appearance; but the faith remains in an ideal
freed from all the burdens of earth in the Kingdom of God” ( pp . 435ff-)> This
is a distinctly modernized solution of the problem ; in reality, Luther firmly
maintains the old solution of Scholasticism, the solution with the aid of con-
ceptions of Natural Law and the Gospel, only transplanted from the mediaeval
idea of an ascent from Nature to Grace, to the new sphere in which both are
within each other. Otherwise Luther himself appeals to Augustine : “Thus I
have written about the secular authority as glorious and useful as no teacher
has done since the time of the Apostles, excepting possibly St. Augustine”
( Krieg wider die Tiirken , B. A ., IV, i,p. 441). In his writings about the Peasants*
Revolt and the war he teaches the dualistic morality of the use of law, force,
and authority on the one hand, and of the suffering and sacrificial ethic of
love of the Sermon on the Mount on the other hand, in an often absolutely
amazingly harsh distinction; see, for example,/?/;. 322 ff . : “What do you think
that Christ would say to it that you bear His Name and call yourselves a
Christian body when you are so far away from that, when, indeed, you do
and teach so abominably against His law that you are not even worthy of
being called Turks or heathen, but much worse, since you violently oppose both
Divine and Natural Law which is observed among all the heathen (by rebellion
and the encouragement of a Christian form of communism) . . . Further, we
will now speak of the Christian and evangelical law, which does not bind the
heathen like the former law, for as you boast and like to hear that you are
called Christians and also wish to be regarded as such, so you must also endure
that I hold up to you your law. Give ear now, beloved Christians, and listen
to your Christian law. Thus speaks Christ (Matt. v. 39) : ‘Resist not evil,
but he who impels thee to go with him one mile go with him two, and who
takes thy cloke let him take thy coat also and he who strikes thee upon the one
cheek, offer him also the other. . . .’ Indeed, Christ says (Matt. v. 44) that we
ought to wish good to those who do us evil, and pray for our persecutors and
love our enemies and do good to those who injure us. These are our Christian
rights, dear friends. ... A child, indeed, would understand from these sayings
that it is a Christian law not to resist evil, not to take to the sword, not to
defend oneself, not to revenge oneself, but to deliver up one’s body and one’s
possessions, and let anyone take it who will. We indeed have enough in our
Lord Himself who will not leave us as He has promised. Suffering, suffering
cross, cross is the Christian’s law and there is no other.” Or,/;. 363 : “There are
two kingdoms : the one is the Kingdom of God, the other the kingdom of the
world (in this instance he does not mean the realm of evil, but of the natural
creation of Reason). . . . God’s Kingdom is a kingdom of grace and mercy and
not a kingdom of wrath or of punishment. For it means nothing but forgiveness
and protection, loving and serving, doing good, having peace and joy, etc.
But the kingdom of this world is a kingdom of wrath. In this kingdom there is
nothing but punishment and resistance, judgment and condemnation in order
to force the evil and to protect the good. Therefore also this kingdom possesses
and wields the sword. . . . The texts which speak of mercy belong to the
Kingdom of God and to Christians, they do not apply to the secular law.
For a Christian must not only be merciful, but he must also suffer all manner of
PROTESTANTISM
867
evil, etc. But the kingdom of this world, which is simply the servant of the
Divine wrath over evil men and the precursor of hell and of eternal death,
and it must not be merciful but severe, etc. . . . ; it looks upon the evil men
that it may punish them and hold them in check and in peace for the protection
and the deliverance of the good.” This, indeed, is something other than the
relation between the idea and the appearance.
262 (p* 553-) pessimism is strongly emphasized by Brandenburg : “Thus
at the beginning at least he had an ideal floating about in the air of a Christian
society which should be governed by an authority informed with the Christian
spirit. This authority, however, was not to be subordinate to the spiritual
authority and directed by it ; otherwise its actions would be forced and value-
less; but while it possessed an equal right externally it was to be combined
with the spiritual authority in the same Christian spirit. . . . This thought runs
right through Luther’s Address to the Nobility of the German Nation . But the dream
soon faded, and when he awoke Luther found himself alone with a few
like-minded souls among the heathen, and he gained the conviction that this
was how it would remain. Henceforward he had no more interest in trying to
picture how a Christian Society might be created and ought to be, for, he
thought, it indeed will never come to pass; the few Christians scattered
throughout the world will never be able to form a closely knit community.
The world as it is cannot be governed with Christian love according to the
Gospel ( p . 9). . . . Therefore Luther says: ‘If thou sufferest violence and
injustice, thou must say that is the government of this world. If thou wilt
live in the world, that is what thou must expect. Thou wilt never succeed in
bringing about that it should happen otherwise. If thou wilt live among the
wolves, then thou must howl with them. Here in this world we are serving in
an inn where the Devil is master, and the world is the landlady, and all kinds
of evil passions are the servants ; and these all are the enemies and opposers of
the Gospel. Thus if thy money is stolen or thou art injured in thy honour, that
is just what thou hast to expect in this house. 5 Nowhere do I find the essential
element in Luther’s outlook on the world so clearly expressed as in this illustra-
tion. The monk wishes to forsake the service of the devilish landlord by flight,
the struggling Church desires to tear the rule out of the hands of the innkeeper
by external means of authority and gain control of the domestics; at first
Luther hoped to be able to convert the inhabitants and fill them with the
Christian spirit ; now, however, he has given up this hope, but in spite of that
he wants to stay in the terrible house. For he is not there of his own will, but
because he has been placed there by his God. Therefore he desires to do his
duty here, to let himself be beaten and ill-treated if it pleases the evil master
and his servants to do this, but he will not stir from the spot till his Lord calls
him away, and every good hour which he enjoys he will rejoice in as a special
grace” ( pp . 5^.). Brandenburg , in my opinion, lays too much stress upon these
passages — at least alongside of them there are others in which the Christian
order of life in public and private morality seems to be something possible
and desirable, upon which, indeed, his ethical text-book, the Greater Catechism,
is constructed. In my opinion the really characteristic element is rather his
alternation between that despairing pessimism and the triumph that the
genuinely evangelical order has at last become a reality. The principles, on
the other hand, in which Lenz ( p . 440) describes the continued influence of
Lutheran ideas as the “vital mark of our people” (“in them is rooted the right
of our sword, its might, and our obedience. With forceful power they fetter
everyone to the public will, and in freedom millions serve them without
868 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
difference of creed. They are interwoven with every public office, with our
customs of marriage and family life, with our ideals of war ( !) and all our ( !)
work of peace. Upon this foundation our whole classical literature ( !) has
grown up, and these ideas still dominate large sections of our art ( !) ; only
through them has genuine tolerance and free research ( !) become possible**),
are only very partially of Lutheran origin. A continued influence of the
Lutheran idea of the State and of Society in reality only takes place in the
Weltanschauung of the Conservative party, and, above all, in its standard-
bearer Stahly who, however, found himself obliged to incorporate Calvinistic
and Independent individualism into the newly formed Lutheran i4ea of the
State ; cf. Stahl: Der christliche Staat.
803 (p- 554*) Gf. L. von Seckendorff: Teutscher Furstenstaat, 5 , 1687 (at first i6$6)y
especially c. /, 5 and 8 of the third section. The author, however, confesses in
the Foreword : “I have often been obliged to put the Regula instead of that
which in reality I ought to find, but which I found nowhere, or very little.** —
Especially characteristic of the spirit of the whole is pp. 194$.'. “The main
aim of all this is the healthful preservation of the police, or of the whole
Government, in its august power and greatness, and the ultimate aim is the
glory of God.’* In Christian States, however, the task is not /tie rely that of the
maintenance of authority, the prevention of crime, and the preservation of
peace, but also the moral furtherance of the subjects, “a constant approximation
and exercise, which among the ancient pagan peoples of Greece and Rome
was sought in many kinds of instruction from learned philosophers and poets.
But in a Christian State the Government can and must go still further in this
matter”. It must cultivate right sentiments and dispositions, and since this
cannot be brought about by compulsion and by the law, the discipline of the
Church, the home, and the school must also be used for this purpose. “Not-
withstanding this, however, there are certain matters in the administration of
a country which concern every person in it ; these are dealt with by the Govern-
ment, since they also can bring harm and vexation to others in the same land
if they are not wisely regulated. As, for instance, a seemly outward celebra-
tion of Sundays and festivals, the avoidance of shameful drunkenness, and
where, after a certain time of day, one must stop tippling and treating. Further,
a regular calling and activity and the avoidance of idleness . . ., fo* which
purpose also an excellent method is the provision of a house of correction for
those naughty persons, for the improvement of their life and for the relief
of the minds of other people. The preservation of a seemly order and precedence
between the various classes and subjects, according to their honour, their
position, and their office, in all events and gatherings, both in clothing and in
other outward things . . ., in order that confusion, misunderstanding, and
vexation may be prevented.” This conservatism, however, is only to serve the
cause of peace and order, but it is not to exclude all idea of progress (p. 5/5).
“The Government is bent on introducing into the country more and more
what will be useful and will serve the way of peace and understanding, by all
kinds of friendly methods, and granting of immunities, it desires to show that
it desires to encourage progress and advancement in many ways.” — Joh .
Gerhard , in his Loci (ed. Cotta , 1775)9 vols . XIII and XIV , develops the Natural
Law and Christian ideas of the State in great breadth and detail, with, however,
the lack of vision, which considers it quite possible to realize the ideal of a
Christian society with a Christian spirit of the government, pure Church
doctrine and the humble obedience of the subjects: “Utraque potestas ad
ecclesiae collectionem conservationem ac propagationem itemque ad Dei
PROTESTANTISM
869
gloriam ordinata est. Mutuas cnim sibi tradunt operas. . . . Sine ecclesiastico
ministerio commode quidem, at non pie ; sine politica potestate pie quidem,
sed non commode vivi potest. (XIII , 225) ! The “Magistratus sunt Dii terrestres”
(XIV , 305) ! This lack of vision is also reflected in the ideal of the Primitive
State, which in development without the Fall would have been, in spite of
that, a “subjectio”, but only a “subjectio filialis” instead of a “subjectio
servilis” (p. 240 ). On treaties: “Foedera ipsa urgente rei publicae necessitate
cum infidelibus et diversae religionis hominibus instituta non possunt absolute
et simpliciter improbari ; cavendum interim, ne adhaereat fiducia in humanum
auxilium ac diflidentia erga Deum neve defensio ecclesiae, quae est solius
dei opus? foederibus illis transscribatur” (XIV, 14). Support of oppressed
co-religionists in foreign countries only allowed as diplomatic (XIV, 72). All
that is said about the Sermon on the Mount is that it is parabolic in character
and must not be taken quite literally, and of the law it says simply : “Observa
etiam quod magistratus dicatur constitutus subditis in bonum, nimirum ut
bonum publicum promoveat justitiam administrando, justos defendendo,
sontes puniendo. Quare cum hoc bono et dono divinitus concesso utimur,
hoc est cum officium magistratus imploramus, recte omnino facimus” (XIV, 133 ).
As in the Churqji, the Church law has been introduced as the Divine law,
and is in general no longer a problem, so also for the State and for Society,
law and might have ceased to be a problem, they are a bonum divinitus con -
cessum (p. 137 ). The comprehensive polemic against the Anabaptists is a
thorough transformation of the Sermon on the Mount, in the light of other
passages of Scripture, which is continually being renewed ; the spirit of the
whole is that of the most extreme Philistine theological politics.
264 (P- 554 *) On this point cf. Roscher: Geschichte der Nalionalokonomik and
Aug. Oncken: Geschichte der Nationalokonomie , I, 1302; and also the well-known
treatises by Schmoller: Z ur Geschichte der Nationalokonomischen Ansichten in
Deutschland wdhrend der Reformationsperiode, Z-f ■ d. gesamte Staatswissenschaft, i860,
pp. 461-716; Wiskemann: Darstellung der in Deutschland z. Z- der Reform, herrschenden
Nationalok. Ansichten (Jablonowskische Preisschrift, 1861); also Uhlhorn: Geschichte
der christlichen Liebestatigkeit , III , 1830; Uhlhorn: Katholizismus und Prot. gegeniiber
der sozialen Frage 2 , 1887; see Eck in the detailed introduction to Luther's Von
Kaufhandlung und Wucher, Bd. IV, 1, pp. 434-513; K. Kohler: Luther und die
Juristen,pp. 1 11-124; Bbhmer: Luther im Licht der neueren Forschung,pp. 130-133;
Brandenburg: Luthers Stellung zu Staat und Gesellschaft; Frank G. Ward, presentation
and estimate of Luther’s views of the State and its economic tasks ; Conrad's
Abhh., XXI, 1838; finally, my own presentation of the subject in Kultur der
Gegenwart, pp. 544-552 . — For the general economic setting in which the
position of the Reformers moved, see Lamprecht: Deutsche Geschichte, V and
VI; Schmoller: Das Merkantilsystem in seiner historischen Bedeutung (Umrisse
und Untersuchungen, 1830, pp. 1-60), the numerous researches of G. von Below,
especially the Untergang der mittelalterlichen Stadtwirtschaft (Jahrb.fiir Nationalok.
und Statistik , 1301 ) and Territorium und Stadt , 1300 ; examples of the economic
situation in the towns in Bothe: Frankfurter Patriziervermogen im 16. Jahrh .,
Archiv fur Kultur geschichte, Beiheft 2, 1308; for rural and provincial conditions,
see Schauenburg, 100 Jahre Oldenburgischer Kirchengeschichte , V, 1308. For the
seventeenth century, see compilations in Handtke: Deutsche Kultur im
des 30 j . Kriegs , 1306, see Below: Die Frage des Riickgangs der wirtsch. Verhaltnisse
vor dem 30 j . Krieg (Vierteljahrsschrift fur Soz •- und Wirtschafts geschichte, 1303,
pp. 160-167). At the present day we must take it for granted that the great
economic and social upheavals of the sixteenth century arose independently
870 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
of the religious movement, and that in them Lutheranism at first adopted an
essentially reactionary attitude, whereas the casuistical ethic of Catholicism
was in a position to make compromises with them.
a6# (p* 555*) On the “traditionalist” character of the Lutheran doctrine of
property, see Max Weber: Geist des Kapitalismus , Archiv . XX, pp. 44-50 ; on the
ethical objection to competition which is evident, particularly in Luther’s
doctrine of prices, Schmoller, 451 ff. Luther himself says (Kaufhandlung, BA,
p . 527) : “We ought to be satisfied with a very moderate standard of living . . .
not day and night try to reach something higher.” Oncken calls this the
“ascetic” conception of industry in contrast to the “hedonistic” conception
which entered in with Adam Smith {pp. 152, 149). In the question of usury
Melanchthon is more inclined to compromise than Luther, and the later
orthodox Lutherans did not perpetuate Luther’s severe attitude towards
usury, Neumann: Geschichte des Wuchers; that, however, does not mean a new
principle, but only the modification which we notice everywhere of Luther’s
ethical radicalism.
272 (P* 557*) This non-feudal character is also a marked feature of the medi-
aeval economic ethic ; on the relation of both elements in the mediaeval town and
in the Canon Law, see Oncken , I, 125 , who is excellent on t^iis point; Oncken
describes it as the system of the “gebundene Geldwirtschaft”, which is opposed
to the later “ungebundene” capitalistic economy of the towns. The Reformers
only opposed the latter kind. Only so were they in a position to prefer the
Roman law, which is quite opposed to the feudal constitution and favours
both an economy based on money and the principate of the territorial lord.
The modern tendency of the Reformers consists essentially in handing over
economic matters to the territorial lords, who are obliged and entitled to
increase possessions and industry for the good of the whole; cf. Schauenburg:
s. Theol. Jahresbericht , 436. Thus with the blessing of Lutheranism and without
ecclesiastical control they entered the path of mercantilism as well as that of
an absolutist social policy. Otherwise already Scholasticism had empowered
the territorial lords to gather treasure, and thus they were exempt from civic
morality ( Oncken , I, p. 128 ).
278 (P- 55^0 Cf. the highly characteristic passages in Kaufhandlung, BA.
IV, 1, pp. 523-527, on the four ways in which we ought to behave in a Qhristian
way in business: firstly, that we ought to allow ourselves willingly to be
exploited if the Government does not prevent it ; secondly, that we ought to
give to those in need freely ; thirdly, that we ought to lend without receiving
it back again. Then only comes the fourth way, that we buy and sell goods
for goods or goods for money as a measure of value and a method of preserving
value; for the latter end, however, the fixing of the pretium justum by the
Government is necessary. Yet still more plain is the much-quoted letter to the
people of Dantzig in the year 1525, in which he says that the taking of interest
is forbidden by the Gospel, but then continues : “But the Gospel is a spiritual
law by which one cannot govern, but about which each man must decide for
himself whether he will observe it or whether he will leave it alone. And one
may and ought to force no one to it, any more than to faith ; for here it is
not the sword but the Spirit of God which must teach and govern. Therefore
the spiritual rule of the Gospels must be separated from the external secular
rule and the two must not be mixed with each other. . . . The Gospel teaches,
indeed, that one is to have no care for possessions at all, but whoever forces
me he takes from me that which is mine.” Thus according to human law he
would sanction at least a limited and officially fixed interest of 5 per cent.
PROTESTANTISM
871
(Oncken, I, p. 144 ). This, again, is the well-known dualistic ethic of Luther on
account of which Luther’s attitude on the question of interest has often been
called hesitating and uncertain; that, however, is not so inwardly and in
itself in the Christian demand it is not so ; it only becomes so when the serious
effort to realize it in practice is given up and when a secular use is recognized
in addition.
274 (p- 55^0 Thus Luther is ready to tolerate the sins which inevitably belong
to the desire for gain which characterizes the system of trade which is allowed :
“Therefore thou shalt not burden thy conscience with that, but thou must
bring it to God as another sin which cannot be overcome to which we are all
prone ; oJmmend it thus to God with the paternoster and leave it to Him, for
necessity and the kind of work drives thee into this failing, not knavery and
envy, for I am speaking here of good-hearted and God-fearing people who do
not wish to do wrong. Just as the duty of marriage is not carried out without
sin, and still on account of necessity God winks at it because there is nothing
else to be done” (BA., IV, i,pp.gigff). It is exactly the same with the toleration
of the compulsory character of the State as the “kingdom of wrath”.
276 (p. 560.) On this contrast see Schmoller, g6g, ggi, 6g2, and yig ; on a motive
of Socialism present among the Reformers, and only restricted in favour of the
situation conditioned by original sin, see Schmoller, 708 ff. ; on the religious and
ethical motives for the regulations in defence of the poor and the debtors
(as in the Canon Law), see Schmoller, 323 and ggi. The Socialistic element,
which — on a religious basis, and with the presupposition of sin and inequality —
the canonistic Lutheran doctrine contains, is also emphasized by Oncken, p. 135 ;
there also note the connection between the physiocratic doctrine and this
“natural economic ethic”.
281 (p. 561.) For the social organization in Luther’s view which quite
corresponds to the mediaeval idea, see Brandenburg, p. 11; Schmoller , pp. 473,
483-487, 688. How natural Luther found the guild organization is shown by
the anecdote in his Table Talk, according to which Luther claimed that
among the tailors there ought to be special groupings for making breeches,
jerkins, or coats, in order that the work might be better ( Schmoller , p. 487).
There is a wealth of material for the social history of Lutheranism in Drews:
“Einfltts^der Gesellschaftlichen Zustande auf das kirchliche Leben y * (Z f. Theol. und
Kirche, igo6), and “Der ev. Geistliche in der deutschen Vergangenheit” , 1303. To a
great extent the theory continues the barren scholastic threefold division ; the
third estate is never constructed in its constituent parts, the urban and agrarian,
and then further in their mutual organization ; above all, the fourth estate of
servants, day-labourers, serfs, and slaves never appears in a category by itself.
As a rule the theologians deal with the status economicus as a domestic economy
in which the servants are included and which as far as possible they regard
as a self-contained household ; cf. the meagre statements in Schmidt: Ev.-Luth.
Dogmatik,p. 462 ; here the only distinctions that are made are the societas paterna,
that is, the smaller family group, and the societas herilis, that is the legitima
dominorum et servorum conjunctio divinitus instituta ob mutuam utilitatem, and for
all further detail people are commended to the study of the Decalogue. The
real social theory and policy is left in the hands of the authorities, of the princely
police, and of the financiers ; the theological ethic emphasizes only the general
principle of patriarchalism. — A book which Gottfried Arnold often quotes and
uses, called Spiegel aller Stdnde, by J. Cuno, I was unable to obtain.
282 (p. 561 .) On this point Luther exclaims against the demand of the peasants
that serfdom ought to be abolished (BA. IV, i,pp . 334 ff -) : “There ought to be
872 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
no serfs because Christ has set us all free. What then is that? This means
Christian freedom would be quite carnal — did not Abraham and other
patriarchs and prophets also have bondmen? Read St. Paul and what he
teaches about the servants who in his time were all slaves! Therefore, this
article is clean against the Gospel and sheer robbery, for every man who con-
siders his body thus his own has stolen it from his master. For a serf can,
indeed, be a Christian and have Christian freedom, just as a prisoner or a sick
man is a Christian and still is not free. This article wishes to make all men
equal and make the spiritual Kingdom of Christ into a secular external
kingdom which is impossible. For a secular kingdom cannot exist without
personal inequality where some are free and some are bound, some are lords
and others are subjects.” In another passage he exhorts even the Christian
prisoners of war who have been enslaved by the Turks to endure their state of
slavery patiently: “Thou must think that thou hast lost thy freedom, without
which thou thyself canst do nothing apart from the will and knowledge of
thy master without sin and disobedience. For in so doing thou dost rob and
steal thy body from thy master, which he has bought or otherwise gained that
it henceforward is not thine but his possession like a cow or any of his other
goods” ! ! BA . IV, /, p. tfg. Thus the fresh expansion of serfdom in the agri-
cultural districts and estates on the eastern side of the Elbe from the time of
the sixteenth century was entirely unhindered by Lutheranism (see Gothein:
Agrargeschichte in Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart , I, p. 2807). A legal stabiliza-
tion of human rights did not take place at least in Germany until the time of
the Enlightenment, and until the present day it is only from this point of view
that this is possible.
883 (p- 561 •) F, J. Stahl: Der christliche Staat, p. 8, the patriarchal fundamental
theory; p. 77, the opposition of the modern principle. The continuance, or,
rather, the reawakening by the Restoration of these tendencies in modern
Conservatism, is described in a most interesting manner with a large number of
extracts from the Conservative Press by Stillich: Die politischen Parteien in Deutsch-
land, /. Stillich, however, sees in this only an expression of the Conservative
class struggle, and overlooks the connection between this class struggle and the
reawakening of the pure ideological motives of Lutheranism, through which
alone it can be carried on in the name and with the energies of a .popular
outlook on the world ; see p. 55 for the class, or as we say to-day in order to
distinguish it from the mechanical individualistic principle, the organic
conception of Society of the Conservatives ; see likewise pp. 8y and 2ig ; p. 143
for the economic traditionalism which is bound up with that.
188 (p. 562.) Cf. the presentation of this political economy by Roscher and
especially by Oncken , 1, 226-236 : “Political economy as a specific form of the
mercantilistic literature of Germany bears on the one hand a populationist
character, and on the other a character of the science of State finance. In a
‘productive* town and country population, and in a flourishing ‘aerarium*, the
wealth of the land consists. One must also say in praise of the political econo-
mists that they have honestly and eagerly tried to cope with the tasks which
have faced them: it cannot be denied, however, that when at that time the
wealth of a sovereign prince was measured by the number of his subjects, this
mostly happened in the sense in which in our own day a landowner is esteemed
according to the number of his cattle.** Noteworthy is the similarity of the
Catholic and the Protestant branch of this political economy in its theological
ethical presuppositions and its practical political results. Only the Protestant
tendency is represented in more fullness and variety (p. 232 ). Oncken calls
PROTESTANTISM
873
attention rightly to the “semi-Socialist character” and the tendency to the
“middle class” (/>. 22 g), but he does not sufficiently emphasize the connection
with the religious ethic. It is everywhere quite plain that the emphasis on
peace, order, the exclusion of competition, the stabilizing or new regulation
of the class-organization, proceed from the standpoint of the ethic of love,
which is opposed to the free struggle for existence. The “free couise of com-
merce” is “evil and foolishness” (p. 231). The whole exclusiveness and the
lack of individual initiative are both due to religious motives as well as based
on circumstances without its being possible to describe the religious theory as
simply a reflection of the actual circumstances. It is a reaction behind the lay
culture or civilization of the town of the later Middle Ages which is based on the
one hand on the actual political and social development of conditions of power
and economics, but on the other hand also on the reactionary religious theory
of Luther about economic and social questions which is quite independent of
the former. That the formation of greater States, with a unity of administration
which follows with this from another point of view is progress, or the pre-
supposition of progress, is a matter of course ; only that kind of idea is not
consciously intended by Lutheranism, whether of the theological or of the
juridical political 4 cind.
289 (p- 567.) Cf. Uhlhorn , III , 315-414 . One of the chief defects in this other-
wise excellent book is that it does not recognize and emphasize the return to
the principle of charity as such, and therefore it does not discern the real
reasons for this return. They lie in the failure of the early Lutheran patri-
archalism, which believed that in the cosmos of “callings” all were cared for,
and only provided the Kasten for exceptional cases. It is of the essence of
the new period of Protestant philanthropy since Pietism arose that it no longer
depends upon the organization of the State, nor upon the official activity of
the Church, but that it organizes its charity freely from the laity and from the
local congregations. Instead of that, in order to explain this new period Uhlhorn
suggests that it is due to the influence of the philanthropy of the Enlightenment,
which decidedly had very little part in it. Further, Uhlhorn rightly lays a
great deal of emphasis upon the influence of Calvinism and of Catholicism ;
also the fact that the opposition of the official Lutheran Church is a sign that
it regards these returns to Calvinistic and Catholic lay activity as something
new and strange. That in reality the Catholic principle of charity was being
approached in this activity is shown by the way in which Fliedner and Wichern
appeal to the institutions of the Primitive Church, as well as by some involuntary
expressions of Uhlhorn : “There is a danger of falling into a very widespread
habit of almsgiving all the more because the various associations have little
or no connection with each other, and the applicant has only a very external
link with the association. . . . But the most serious result would be if those
people were right who say that the number of charitable associations which at
present exist is a symptom that the historic groups, the State and the Church,
are breaking up as in the Roman Empire and towards the close of the Middle
Ages” ( p . 412). The similarity of these associations with the Catholic Religious
Orders is often noted and carefully denied.
890 (P* 588.) Cf. Uhlhorn , ///, 347 ff -364, and especially Wernle: J. H. Wichern ,
igo8. In the Commission of the Central Committee for Home Missions, Wernle
summarizes the content of Wichern’s Memorial of 1849: “Within the sphere
of the State the Home Mission ought to fight against the revolutionary spirit,
and also care for the welfare of the prisoners and of discharged criminals.
In the ecclesiastical sphere it is her main task to give to every baptized Christian
874 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the full opportunity of hearing the pure Word of God ; this means that Bible
Societies, Bible Study Groups, special Missions, etc., must be instituted.
In the general sphere of morals it must oppose prostitution, drunkenness, and
bad literature, and finally in the social sphere it must do all that is possible to
maintain and to save family life ; it must care for the poor and the sick ; it must
organize Christian Workmen’s Unions over against the Communist organiza-
tions ; it must take special care of manual labourers who are in great need and
of apprentices for whom colonies on the land should be created” ( p . 38). For
the reasons of failure he says rightly: “The methods of saving almost all
proceed from a very marked lack of understanding of the true intellectual,
political, and social distress of the modern day ; they accept the old Christianity
of authority and the old political and social order as apparently sanctioned by
Divine authority, and, therefore, as something which is quite natural. . . .
Above all, they are unable to place over against the modern emancipation
movement any great positive aim in which the deeper longings of the recent
time might be able to find itself” ( p . 33). Further, however, ecclesiastical
Lutheranism did not accept these proposals, which already seemed to it to be
too revolutionary. “It is the tragic element in the life of Wichern that all his
enthusiasm and his energy of love broke in vain on the «rock of this rigid
Lutheran tradition. In addition to Lutheran ecclesiasticism, the greatest
hindrance . . . was the political reaction, and especially in the fact that it
sanctioned the Home Mission” ( p . 48). In vain Wichern tried to avoid this
political disintegration (p. 43).
201 (p. 568.) Cf. Gdhre: Evangelisch-soziale Bewegung, 1836. It is interesting to
note how in Rud. Todt and his central association, Lutheranism, completely
overwhelmed by the knowledge of the new situation becomes quite bewildered,
believes that it ought to evolve a new social theory to meet the new conditions,
and composes this theory under the influences of Socialism and the Sermon
on the Mount. Yet even Todt’s State Socialism retained strongly patriarchal
conservative features. Stocker’s work developed this latter dual tendency still
farther, and finally sacrificed the social reform tendencies to middle-class
patriarchal High Church ideas; Gdhre , ioj. The Kirchlich-Soziale Konferenz,
which inherited Stocker’s ideas, went farther in this direction. The Protestant
Workmen’s Unions also display the same dualistic point of view ; Gdhri, pp. 116
and 1 S3. The cause of that, however, is not merely political, but also the after-
effect of the old tradition of Lutheran ethics.
222 (p. 568.) So, for example, the earlier Hanoverian Church leader, Uhlhorn:
Kath. und Prot. Appealing to the tradition of Lutheranism, and in decided
opposition to the changes in the Lutheran spirit introduced by Stdcker, he
wishes to see the Church solely occupied with the preaching of the Word and
he lays down as the social service of the Church : ( 1 ) the re-emphasis on the
dignity of labour in which the modern work in factories can be ennobled in a
Christian manner, just as slavery was ennobled in the Early Church; (2) the
proclamation to the masters of a patriarchalism which recognizes the infinite
value of every Christian soul ; (3) Sunday observance, the building of churches,
the institution of new parishes ; (4) the creation of smaller and more living
congregations ; (5) bringing under the control of the Church the very varied
philanthropy which flourished in very different forms, sometimes Pietistic and
sometimes almost Catholic, and the making of this charity into a definite task
of parochial Poor Relief. Otherwise, however, the Church ought solely to place
the Word of God upon the lampstand, so that “Christian” statesmen, jurists,
political economists, members of parliament, manufacturers, bankers, and
PROTESTANTISM
875
workmen “then freely, according to their special insight, can effect social
reform’*. To the Church itself, this is not commanded : “The Church is only
concerned with that pertaining to spiritual possessions, righteousness, peace,
and the Holy Ghost, and these possessions need to be gained whatever the
external conditions of man may be” ( p . 44). This, however, presupposes that
those Christian statesmen, etc., will find also a social order which will corre-
spond with the Christian ideal of Lutheranism, and that that which they
discover will neither disturb nor alter Lutheran dogma and ethics! — Less
unconcerned in this respect is Nathusius: Die Mitarbeit der Kirche an der Losung der
Sozialen Frage z , 1904 ; he therefore desires a High Church intensification of the
independence and power of the Church, and he gives the “Christian” states-
men, etc., some hints upon what assumptions they ought to base their thought
and their action.
293 (p- 568.) Cf. Wenck: Gesch. d. Nationalsozialen, 1905. Naumann completed
the process of development from charity to Christian social reform, and from
this to a social formation based purely upon general political and economic
causes which cannot be effected by religious ideas directly, and in so doing
he gave the religious element back again to its more limited sphere. This again
leads him to the tradition of Lutheranism, but with the important alteration
that he requires a general social development which is strongly opposed to the
main ethical idea of Lutheranism ; this led naturally to a critical and dis-
integrating reflex effect upon Lutheran dogma and its ethic, as his Brief e iiber
Religion shows. On the other hand, he emphasizes increasingly the indirect
importance of the religious element for the freedom and value of personality
in contrast to the oppressive influence to be expected from a bureaucratic
capitalism.
204 (p- 568.) Cf. the Reports of the Ev.-soz. Kongress since 1890, especially the
address by P. Drews at the last Congress in 1909; otherwise, Gohre , 199-162.
Since Stocker left the Congress and the Conservatives became increasingly
reluctant to identify themselves with this movement, the Congress has become
more and more a place for the discussion of all the important leading questions
of the Lutheran ethic, both practical and theoretical ; this is also proved by the
fact that it is now under the chairmanship of the leader of progressive Protestant
theology, Adolf Harnack. The development of thought, which can be traced
in the Reports, of a free Protestantism, gradually turning its attention to ethics
rather than to dogma, is extremely instructive and attractive, but we are here
concerned merely with the first beginnings of a new statement of the problems,
behind which the scientific ethic of modern Protestantism only marches very
reluctantly, and which with its earnestness actually affects very small groups.
But at the present day, where do we find a really penetrating social ethic at all?
295 (P- 589*) Gf. on this point Elisabeth v. Richthofen: Ueber die historischen
Wandlungen in der Stellung der autoritdren Parteien zur Arbeiterschutzgesetzgebung und
die Motive dieser Wandlungen, Heidelberger Diss . , 1901, p. J2: “The hostility between
industry and agriculture, which at first (that is, among the adherents of the
Christian Social party) seemed to lead to the support of the working classes
against their ‘capitalistic exploiters’, has finally culminated, as the result of
the need for labour, in an aversion to the introduction of measures for the
improvement of the situation among industrial workers. . . . The Conservatives
have renounced all initiative in social politics, and have withdrawn to the
standpoint of a purely agrarian representation of interests. Traditional views
and social relationships united them with men of that type who wish to
maintain, as far as they possibly can, a patriarchal, dominating system of
876 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
labour which alone corresponds to the principle of authority for which they
stand.” Cf. also Stillich, especially the chapter Die Gesellschaflsauffassung der
Konservativen. Always there is behind all this a certain sense of the value of the
ethical principles of obedience and of authority, on the basis of the theoretical
statement of the essential inequality of mankind which is not merely dictated by
class interest, but which is connected with all the fundamental Christian and
Lutheran tenets ; see the passages in Stillich , pp. 164-167. Further, it is every-
where the peculiarity of the Lutheran Natural Law, to emphasize in Nature
the inequalities and hindrances which oppose an ideal social order from which
it derives ethical values of obedience and of care for others, instead of wishing
to overcome and remove them in a direct and reforming way throdgh ethical
idealism; certainly a very serious ethical question from the consideration of
which we ought not to allow ourselves to be diverted by class- war exploitations
of the principle. The problem of equality forms in reality one of the most
obscure and difficult points in the modern social doctrines of a liberal and
Socialistic nature.
297 (P* 57°-) The Protestant idea of the “calling” is exalted in this way in
the influential works of Ritschl: Geschich. d. Pietismus , and Uhlhorn: Geschich. d.
christlichen Liebestdtigkeit , and Uhlhorn: Prot. und Kath. The critical voices of the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries which summon Lutheranism back to
opposition to the world are here represented as Catholic ascetic, and, what is
identical in both, as sectarian reactions which then were completed in Pietism.
This, however, is a misinterpretation of the dualistic elements in Luther’s own
doctrine. — That both regard the “permeation of civilization” essentially in the
Conservative anti-modern sense is shown by Uhlhorn: Prot . und Kath., where he
gives the advice that the question of Labour should be handled as Paul handled
the problem of slavery (p. 46), and Ritschl , who in his Gotlinger Jubildumsrede
(Drei akademische Reden , 1887), taught that Liberalism, social democracy, and
the Catholic doctrine of Society had arisen out of the same root of individualistic
Rationalism, while he claimed for Lutheranism an historic anti-Rationalist
basing of Society upon power and force, somewhat in the sense of Heinrich
von Treitschke, and thus explained the filling of the relationships of life which
have thus been created with trust in God and loyalty to one’s “calling” for
the anti-mediaeval modern civilization; this leads, then, to insight ^nto “the
Conservative task of the State understood in the light of history” (p. 61). The
intention is similar when in the book by Loo/s: L.'s Stellung, Luther is represented
as the victor over the mediaeval world and the founder of the modern world ;
the “modern world” of Loofs is possibly Prussian free Conservative or National
Liberal of the Right.
890a (P- 57 1 -) RitschVs Jubildumsrede has a right feeling for this special
character of the Lutheran Natural Law contrasted with that of Catholi-
cism and Calvinism. Rightly there also the Catholic, Liberal, Socialist (and
Calvinist) idea is connected with Greek Rationalism, even though otherwise
the account of the history of the Christian social doctrines is far from clear.
We must, however, note that Greek speculation had already foreshadowed that
difference, and had taught alongside of the Rationalist-individualistic Natural
Law also that anti-Rationalistic positivist Natural Law; cf. Hirzel: Ndpog
Aypapog Abhh . d. Sachs. Ak., 1900 ; also Karst: Entstehung der Vertragstheorie ,
Z- f wiss. Politik , 1909, pp. 524-928.
800 (p. 571.) For its general influence on civilization, see Arnold Berger:
Die Kulturaufgaben der Reformation , und desselben Luther. For the dual tendency of
these effects, see the opinions of the good Protestant historian, H. Baumgarten ,
PROTESTANTISM
877
in his famous self-criticism of Liberalism ( Preuss . Jahrbb ., 1866) : “Luther’s
almost exclusive emphasis upon the inward side of religion caused this aspect
to predominate in our character for centuries. . . , Our Lutheran princes, too,
had a policy, and one which was quite new and had never been seen before . . .
the policy of moral scruples, of paternal conscientiousness, of sterling excel-
lence in small things and impotence in large questions, of great industry in
a narrow circle, and stupid laziness when great matters were afoot. It was a
policy of this kind which established and encouraged the solid bourgeoisie of
our towns, the comfortable prosperity of our villages, the success of our schools
and universities, the conscientious industry of our officials, the seriousness of
our science, the purity of our family life ; it has created, or at least developed,
everything of which we may be proud, everything which makes foi happiness
and prosperity in our domestic, private, and economic life. It has, however,
also created that Kleinstaaterei which honours a man only as the father of
a family, but which has no use for him as a man and a citizen, that wretched
Philistinism which keeps our nation in bonds, that terrible habit of cherishing
the most daring fantasies and then of sinking to the ground in despair before
the slightest difficulty. This spirit has sucked the energy and virility out of the
life of the State, 5 nd has turned it, properly speaking, into a sort of Kinder-
garten, which has preserved us from all the dangers of this wicked world, but
also from all its greatness” ( p . 456). Baumgarten then goes on to say that this
Lutheran “inwardness” also caused the cosmopolitanism and lack of national
spirit present in our classical literature and philosophy. And it is a fact that
all this is connected with the specifically Christian side of Luther, but the
question has also another aspect. Bismarck, too, whom Baumgarten admired
for his greatness, but to whom he was opposed in other ways, also appealed
to Lutheranism. But the Lutheranism to which he appeals is certainly not
the definite Christian element in Luther, but his irrational conception of the
Natural Law of power and authority, which for two hundred years certainly
only served to support the claims of the existing authority, but which with the
rise of Prussia were brought out afresh by Stahl as arguments against Liberalism
and the Revolution and developed in a brilliant way; since then, in its con-
nection with the Christian idea of sin and of inequality (in the non-religious
sphere), «it has served the interests of a highly realistic policy of might and
authority which allows the Christian, as an official member of the institutions
determined by sin, to develop all the consequences of the naturalistic idea of
power and authority. It is thus, namely, that H. v. Treitschke has represented
Lutheranism. In so doing, however, as with Bismarck and other Conservatives
of the modern day, the idea of power has frequently become an end in itself,
the duty of the State to care for the Christian character of Society has been
placed in the background, and the co-operation of the policy of power with
the religious end of life has been left in a general way to Providence, who has
made humanity what it is at any rate ; cf. Lenz: Bismarcks Religion. German
social legislation, therefore, is no longer the result of a conception of the State
which is Christian in principle, but it is an incidental use of Christian ideas for
political ends in which that which had been separated fortunately is once
more united.
808 (p* 573-) On this point, see Haendtke: Deutsche Kultur im des 30 j.
Krieges, p. 70: “It is beyond doubt that at that time from the economic point
of view Germany was still very much hampered by mediaeval views ; for in
what other land would it then have been possible (1684-5) to forbid, for
example, the ribbon-loom which was so important, as took place at Nurnberg
878 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
at the request of the lace-makers, or as happened at Frankfort-on-the-Maine ;
in 1666 permission was refused to set up a weaving-loom such as had already
been Seen in 1665 at the Frankfort Fair. . . .” Also in other places it was
unthinkable that the question of machinery was made “ ‘une affaire de con-
science* by the ‘premier confesseur et predicateur de L*Electeur de Saxe*.**
We ought to place alongside of that the often-quoted sentence of Uhlhorn
that the machine is in itself Protestant ! — Laveleye : Prot, u. Kath. u . deren Bezie •
hungen zur Freiheit und Wohlfahrt der Volker, deutsch 1875, deals with Protestantism
in general, it is true, but in point of fact it refers always only to Calvinism.
The only points which apply to Lutheranism are the reference to the increased
intellectualism of a doctrinal and book religion. In this realm of thought there
is need for some much more exact research.
807 (p. 575.) In reference to the great European “Restoration** (of the early
part of the nineteenth century), its world of thought, and its social history,
there is no really satisfactory work, which represents its difference from the
modern world. Church histories in particular, which should have a good deal
to say on this question, are totally inadequate. Either they glorify the reawaken-
ing of faith, which to them is something quite natural contrasted with the sin
and evil of the modern world, or they complain of the destruction of the
beginnings of reform which they regard as the result of reactionary politics
and selfishness. A deeper understanding of the subject is found in the brilliant
book by Meinecke: Weltbiirgertum und Nationalstaat , igo8 , which deals with a
different subject. This writer does justice not only to the Liberal school of
thought (which is usually the only one to which attention is paid), but he traces
the connection from “Stein to Friedrich Wilhelm IV, that is, the Romantic-
Conservative branch of the idea of a national state** ( p . ig). Here also we come
upon the reawakening of the irrational positivist Natural Law in Burke , 126 ff.,
in Adam Muller , 128 , K. L. v. Haller , 212 /., and the religious interpretation of
the Law of Nature as the natural reason guided by God in the process of
development ( 21 1 ), the maintenance of this idea of development alongside of
anti-revolutionary conditions which morally are required, and which belong
to the Christian-patriarchal-aristocratic forms of life ( 217 ), contact with the
ideas of Darwin without giving up the religious interpretation ( 212), the
focusing of this Christian-realistic policy, in opposition to the revolutionary
doctrinaire policy in a Christian universal policy, a new Catholicism ( 221 ),
the entrance of these ideas into Pietist Lutheran circles and the reawakening
of the old Lutheran sociology, combined with a compromise with the modern
idea of a national State, and with increased emphasis upon monarchist
Legitimist ideas (226-232), the complicated blend of these ideas (243-231),
Bismarck’s development out of these theories (300-313). All this, however, is
regarded too much from the “Romantic” point of view, whereas in reality
Romanticism merely formed a bridge to the old ecclesiastical-sociological
ideas, and after that the Christian and ecclesiastical sociology plays its part
alongside of the nationalistic and philosophical-cosmopolitan theories, and
after the victory of Bismarck-Nationalism it is to-day again endeavouring, in
quite an unromantic way, in connection with certain definite interests, to
dominate the situation. The fact that this Romanticism looked first of all
towards Catholicism was because it alone offered the two elements of authority
and internationalism which seemed necessary in order to counteract the
influence of the Enlightenment, whereas the Lutheran churches with their
“advanced** theology, and their dependence on the State, were at first of no
use for this purpose. Since in this respect they have gained their own organized
PROTESTANTISM 879
independence, they, and not Catholicism, which contains within it strongly
Liberal elements, are the real home of Conservatism.
808 (p* 577-) Htindeshagen , in his Beitrdgen zur Kirchenverfassungsgeschichte und
Kirchenpolitiky 1864. , has shown for the first time that the essential difference in
Calvinism is to be sought in this sphere ; in this book the writer counsels his
colleagues in Church history to make the basis of their research into the question
of the conception of the Church “the visible empirical social group formed by
the churches and their laws of life and growth which are still too little known”
instead of dogmatic speculative research ( IX ) ; that is, he is summoning them
to treat Church history from the sociological point of view. “Not merely in
Geneva, but wherever Calvinism extended it found great social crises already
in existence, and it intervened as a stimulating but also a purifying element
which, while it caused ferment, also produced order out of chaos. For Calvinism
the sphere of conflict is never merely religious or ecclesiastical in the purely
religious sense ; the Roman Catholic faith never opposes it simply as such, but
everywhere definitely combined with dynastic interests and principles of
government. Thus it was in the nature of the situation that Calvin and his
co-workers like Zwingli had to take into account not merely individuals but
smaller and great^* nationalities. Thus for Calvin also the Gospel is not merely
an energy which saves all the individuals who believe in it, it is not merely a
comfort for individual burdened consciences, not merely the overcoming of
errors which are dangerous to the soul, but it is at the same time the means of
healing all public and universal ills, the element of purification and renewal
for larger social groups and the foundation-stone upon which this work of
renewal must be based” ( pp . 294 ff.). This passage gives very apt expression to
the difference between Calvinism and Lutheranism. — The recognition of the
fact that in this special form Calvinism also contains an element of considerable
approximation to the tendencies of the modern world (once again in contrast
with Lutheranism) relates this book to more modern researches: Gierke's
Althusius ; Jellinek: Die Erklarung der Menschen- und Biirgerrechte 2 , 1904; and the
treatise by Max Weber on the Geist des Kapitalismus und die prot. Ethik , Archiv
XX und XXL The following works also follow the same line : Rieker: Grundsatze
ref. Kirchenverfassung , and Figgis: From Gerson to Grotius, igoy; v. Schulze-Gavemitz *
Britischer Imperialisms und englischer Freihandel 3 1906 , and my presentation in
Kultur der Gegenwart , IV 7 - 3 Protestantisches Christentum und Kirche. In this matter
also, however, Hundeshagen has already been before us: “ Ueber den Einfluss des
Calvinismus auf die Ideen von Staat und Staatsbiirgerlicher Freiheit” , 1840, also
Baudrillart: Bodin et son temps , 1899 . — The primary reason for the growth of
Calvinism in France and the Netherlands (in addition to that of geographical
proximity) seems to have been its independent ecclesiastical Church formation
and its more decided opposition to Catholicism. Cf. K. Muller: Preuss. Jfahrb.,
1 903 , and Rachfahl: Wilh. v . Oranien und der Niederlandische Auf stand, /, 1906, p. 149.
809 (p* 577*) Cf. A. Kuyper: Reformation wider Revolution (German translation
by Jdger 9 1904). This book is not only Kuyper’s government programme, but,
consisting of lectures delivered at the University of Princeton, which is strictly
Calvinistic, it constitutes a kind of collective creed of modern orthodox
Calvinism. Otherwise in an absolutely unprecedented degree Neo-Calvinism
is here read into the primitive Calvinism of Geneva. It is the book of a dogmatist
and a politician, and as such it is extremely instructive ; as an historical work,
however, it is very misleading.
811 (P* 57®*) Cf. von Bezold : Staat und Gesellschaft des Ref-£eitalters (Kultur der
Gegenwart y //, V, /), p, 81: “In many respects Calvin’s work is reactionary;
880 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
he is especially sharply opposed to the Humanist artistic and natural science
tendencies of his day. When, however, in spite of that Calvinism is here regarded
as an actual ferment which caused the rise of modern Europe, this applies very
largely to its propaganda and development outside Geneva.” The rest of this
section will show how true this last observation is ; I would only add that the
basis for this development was already present in primitive Calvinism. The
earlier part of this quotation is only true within certain very definite limits.
Cf. Arnold: Calvin , igog .
31 a (P* 579 *) Cf. in general Kampschulte: J. C., seine Kirche und sein Staat ,
i86g-gg; Cornelius : Historische Arbeiten , i8gg; Doumergtie: John Calvin (7 vols.) ;
Marcks: Coligny, I, 1892; Rieker : Grundsdtze Reformierter Kirchenverfassung , i8gg;
and Sohm: Kirchenrecht } /; for Church history see in particular Karl Muller .
The two works of Choisy are particularly important, La Thiocratie d GerUve ,
and L'ttat chrttien d Genlve aux temps de Blze ; an analysis from the point of view
of ethics and of the history of dogma in the masterpieces of Schneckenburger and
A. Ritschl , to which we must add Lobstein: Ethik Calvins , i8yy ; also Rachfahl:
Oranien, I, /, igo6; I, 2, igoy ; II, igo8. The results of the researches of the
Jubilee year, 1909, are given by W. Kohler in Th. J. B. for 1910. The following
works ought also to be noted: the Calvinreden of the Siebeck^Verlag, the Calvin -
studien of the Elberfeld group , published by Bohatek , and Calvin and the Reformation,
four studies by Doumergue, Lang , Bavinck, and Warfield', finally, C. F. Arnold:
Calvinrede. — In the research of the present day the relations between early
Calvinism and Martin Buccr and Strassburg emerge very clearly ; this aspect
of the subject is treated by Lang in his Evangelienkommentar, igoo , and also by
W. Kohler: Gott. Gel. Anzeigen, igo2 ; Anrich: Die Strassburger Reformation , Ch. W.
jgoj; von Schubert: Calvinreden, p. 141. Of Calvin’s own writings the chief are
the Institutes and his Letters. — For histories of dogma, see Loofs and Seeberg. —
Above all, there is a great deal of useful material in G'obel: Geschichte des christ-
lichen Lebens in der rheinisch-westf dlischen Kirche, I, i84g; II, 1852; III, i860 ; this
book deals especially with the analogies between Calvinism and Pietism and
the sect-type of which there were many illustrations in the development of
Calvinism in the Netherlands and on the Lower Rhine. This valuable, although
somewhat unctuous book, first shows the matter in a true light, whereas
RitschVs Gesch. d. Pietismus treats the Calvinism of Calvin simply as an imitation
of Luther and a reaction towards Catholicism. Such a statement is only in-
telligible in the light ofRitschl’s curious doctrine that the sect-type is Catholic,
and therefore that any approach to the sect-type means Catholicism and
“mediaeval reaction”. This doctrine makes it impossible to understand the
matter ; rather, together with the Baptists, Calvinism ought to be described as
radical Protestantism and “ Biblizismus ” (that is, a Church in which the Bible
occupies a central position), whereas Lutheranism remains closer to Catholic
conservatism and its institutional spirit. This has been shown in the previous
section, and is of the highest importance for the understanding of the special
nature of the social teaching of Calvinism compared with which Catholicism
and Lutheranism are relatively closer to each other, and in spite of all differences
they move within one common type. Schneckenburger, I, 6, remarks very truly :
“First of all Lutheranism after Catholicism is the direct continuation of Latin
Christianity, a spiritualized transformation of the same, and an actual reform
which is connected with its historical development. In the Calvinistic church
development the aim is not so much a mere reform and spiritual continuation
of historic Latin Christianity as a phenomenon which in principle is a new
formation of Christianity directly formulated from the Scriptures according
PROTESTANTISM
88 1
to its original standard form.” This is confirmed by the undeniably greater
dislike of Catholic and Old Catholic thinkers (among the latter Kampschulte
and Moritz Ritter) for Calvinism than for Lutheranism. Quite similarly also
Ranke expresses himself in one famous passage about the Augsburg Confession. —
A survey of recent literature on Calvinism is given by Knodt: Bedeutung Calvins
und des Calvinismus fur die prot. Welt im Lichte der neueren und neuesten Forschung, igio.
813 (P* 581 .) Cf. the beginning of Book IV in Calvin's Institutes . Here the Church
is regarded as the treasury of grace independent of the individual: “Quia
ruditas nostra et segnities externis subsidiis indigent, quibus fides in nobis et
gignatur et augescat et suos faciat progressus usque ad metam, ea quoque
(Deus) acfdidit, quo infirmitati nostra consuleret ; atque ut augescat Evangelii
praedicatio, thesaurum hunc ad ecclesiam deposuit. Pastores instituit ac
doctores, quorum ore suos doceret Eph. iv. 1 1 . Eos autoritate instruxit. Imprimis
sacramenta instituit, quae nos experimento sentimus plus quam utilia esse
adjumenta ad fovendam et confirmandam fidem. Nam quia ergastulo carnis
nostrae inclusi ad gradum evangelicum nondum pervenimus, Deus se ad
captum nostrum acomodans pro admirabili sua providentia modum prae-
scripsit, quo procul disjuncti ad eum accederemus” (Inst. IV, /, /). — “Quia
nunc de ecclesia'visibili disserere propositum est, discamus vel uno matris
elogio, quam utilis sit nobis ejus cognitio, immo necessaria: quando non alius
est in vitam ingressus, nisi nos ipsa concipiat in utero, nisi pariat, nisi nos alat
suis uberibus, denique sub custodia et gubernatione nos tueatur, donee excuti
carne mortali similes erimus angelis. Neque enim patitur nostra infirmitas a
schola nos dimitti, donee toto vitae cursu discipuli fuerimus. Adde, quod extra
ejus gremium nulla est speranda peccatorum remissio nec ulla sal us” (IV, 1, 4).
An individual is born into this Church as you inherit an entail ; cf. Contre les
Anabaptistes, Corpus Reformatorum, 33, p. 322 : “Ainsi l’homme qui n’a este receu
en l’alliance de Dieu des son enfance, est comme estranger k l’Eglise, iusques
k ce que par la doctrine de salut il soit anient k foy et repentance. Mais alors
sa semence est aussi quant et quant faict domestique de l’Eglise. Et pour ceste
cause les petitz enfants des fiddles sont baptises en vertu de cette alliance, qui
est faicte avec leurs p£res, en leur noms et k leurs profits.” The spiritual nature
of the sacraments which Calvinism teaches thus changes nothing in the con-
ception .ef the Church. Infant Baptism should take place in the presence of
the congregation, but it is always a witness to the child’s birthright in the
Church which it already possesses ; cf. Brief e, II, 34, 38, 243 , 423. In the Sacra-
ment of the Lord’s Supper, moreover, Calvin has retained the idea of objective
wonderful spiritual food, even though solely spiritual, in the interest of the
idea of the Church, and, therefore, he regarded himself as a Lutheran. Although
he lays stress on the exercise of discipline and makes the demand for a worthy
reception of the Sacrament the centre of his idea of a holy community, he
expressly guards against all separatist and sectarian consequences. Where the
Word and the Sacrament are, there for him is the Church, as for Luther, and
since it is impossible to know the inner state of each individual, no separation
between believers and unbelievers is allowed. C.R., 33, p. 68: “Car la majesty
de la parolle de Dieu et de ses sacrements nous doit estre en telle reputation,
que partout ou nous la voyons nous soyons certains que \k il y a Eglise, nonob-
stant les macules et les vices qui pourront estre en la vie commune des hommes.”
The power of excluding individuals from communion, which is to be exercised
by the Church, is good, but it is always only a method of punishment and
education used by the Church, never a separation of the pure and holy from
the Church of the pure doctrine and the pure Word, however much sin she
VOL. U. EE
882 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
may contain : “Je laisse k dire qu’encore pos£ lc cas quc nous nc deussions
avoir aucune consideration que des hommes et de leur mcurs (this is supposed
to be a false assumption of the Baptists), nous pourrions estre souvent abusez en
reiettant une compagnie et ne la daignant estimer Eglise k cause des imper-
fections qui y seraient. Car il se pourrait faire tout les coups, que nous ferons
iniure k beaucoups de sainczt personnages, dont le nombre est cache entre les
meschants comme le bon grain dessoubs la pouille.” These are almost literally
all the characteristics of the idea of the Church contrasted with that of the
sect which I have previously noted (II, g ) . Cf. also the completely Lutheran
formulas for the Church conception, Brief e, I, 6, 57, 76, 271; II, 158, 4og :
“I know very well, thank God, that the true efficacy of the Sacrament does not
depend upon the worthiness of him who dispenses it.” Further, the strongest
emphasis is laid upon the ministry called and established in an orderly manner,
without which there can be no congregation and no Church ; the ministry is
regarded as the vessel which carries the wonderful power of the Church, which
is independent of the personal worthiness of each individual minister ; Brief e, 7 ,
p . 266; II, 18, 47, 52; cf. 272, 357 : Laymen can never be considered suitable for
any office; also “the elders” are not purely lay, for they are ordained in the
same way as a minister ( Choisy , 356). From this there naturally results that so
far as the influence of the State authority extends, only the true religion may
predominate: Brief e , I, pp. g, 311, 344, 445 f; II , pp . 117, 200. The circuitous
route which Luther followed in order to reach this view was not necessary for
Calvin, after events had spoken clearly. Toleration is granted only to the
Truth, and this toleration must predominate. The most characteristic expres-
sion of this absolute assurance of possessing the sole Truth is Calvin’s remark
about the “false martyrs” (the Anabaptists), although Calvin himself at the
same time describes martyrdom as the highest witness to the Truth ; see C. R .,
p. 33 : “Et mesme c’est ce qui discerne les martyrs de Dieu de ceux du Diable
que de mourir pour iuste cause. Pourtant tout ainsi que c’est une Constance
louable que de souffrir la mort, si mestier est, pour le tesmoignage de la
v£rit£ : aussi c’est obstination enrag^e que de souffrir pour mauvaise querelle.
Tellement que celuy qui en souffre le plus, est d’autant plus k vituperer.”
This is a spirit of self-assurance which entirely takes away the breath of the
modern man, but it constitutes the heart of the Church conception and of
the dominion of the Church, the heart of the greatness of those men. Cf. also
Calvin’s self-estimate, Briefe, I, 431 : “So far as I am concerned, my masters,
I am quite certain in my conscience that that which I have taught and written
did not arise out of my own head, but that I have received it from God, and
I must stand firmly by it if I am not to be a traitor to the Truth.” He writes
in the same vein to the Council (I, 444 and II, 67). At the same time the
spiritual nature and inwardness of the Church is preserved, as by Luther,
through the statement that the Church does not force men to believe, but that
the State only compels people to lead an externally Christian life and to use
the means of grace in the interest of society; faith is a miraculous gift
of God and conquers only through the inner power of the Word. — The rest
of this section will show that the Church, together with the State, must and
will also accept and dominate civilization in general ; further, Calvin expresses
everywhere in his views on the Anabaptists that this previous statement is the
logical result of the conception of the Church, C. R-,33,p. g2 : “Touchant de la
fin ou ilz pretendent, ie n’en diray que deux motz: qu’ilz (the Baptists) se
monstrent en cela ennemis de Dieu et du genre humain. Car c’est faire la
guerre k Dieu de vouloir mettre en vitupere ce qu’il honors (that is, in the
PROTESTANTISM
883
Old Testament and through the actual course of history) ; de vouloir fouler
aux piedz cc qu’il a exalte. Et on ne saurait mieux machiner la ruine du monde
et introduire partout qu’en taschant d’abolir le gouvernement civil.” The
emphasis on this objective institutional character of the Church increases with
the various editions of the Institutes, Kostlin: Ueber Cs. Inst. (Stud. u. Krit . ,
j866) i p. 481 ; Rieker tends to emphasize the “fellowship” element in the
Church conception more strongly than the “institutional” (p. 71) ; he considers
that “the latter threatens to absorb the former in course of time”. This,
however, only took place in Independency which precisely on that account
cannot claim pure descent from the thought of Calvinism ; so long as Rieker
abides by the Calvinistic idea pure and simple, he himself must also lay a
great deal of emphasis on the institutional element and the agreement with
Luther (pp. 75, 81 ff.> 8y). The “combination between predestination and a
sectarian individualism” is nowhere completed by Calvin since predestination
is always connected with the “vehicle” of its outworking in the Word and the
Sacrament. In Calvin also, as in Luther, we find the doctrine that the Church
is present wherever the Word and the Sacrament are present even within
Catholicism (Brief e, /, 332, 37 i f 437). The individualism of the doctrine of
predestination is important enough, but it has nothing to do with a “fellowship”
conception of the Church. — Moreover, to speak of an element of Natural Law
in the Calvinist conception of the Church, as does Sohm , Kirchenrecht , p. 697 ,
seems to me a complete misunderstanding of the subject; this is always an
interpretation of primitive Calvinism in terms of modern Calvinism. The
historical problem lies precisely in this transformation, and in this section this
subject will be dealt with very thoroughly.
314 (P- 583*) That in this respect also Calvin at first simply follows Luther
is shown perfectly plainly by the one fact of Luther’s treatise against Erasmus,
De servo arbitrio (for the meaning and importance of this work, see the careful
book by Zickendroht: Der Streit zwischen Erasmus und Luther , 1903). For the inde-
pendent development of the doctrine of predestination, see Alex. Schweizer:
Die Zentraldogmen der reform. Kirche , 1834-36. For the importance and the effect
of this doctrine upon Calvin’s doctrinal system, and, above all, on his ethic
about which there has been much controversy, see the various leading ideas
in Hundeshagen , pp. 301-306. Yet there can be no doubt that for Calvin this
doctrine was of central importance ; see Scheibe : Calvins Prddestinationslehre , 1897.
Ritschl’s opinion that the doctrine of predestination was only an additional
element in Calvin’s system which arose out of his strict obedience to the
Scriptures, is a strange and curious idea which can only be explained from
the point of view of his endeavour to turn Calvin into a mere imitator and
disciple of Luther; see his Geschichtl. Studien zur christlichen Lehre von Gott ., Jbb.
f. deutsche Theol., 1863 and 1868; from my own point of view the agreement
with Scotism, which is here asserted, is only due to analogy and not to origin.
315 (P* 583*) Lob stein , 82-86. Luther always looked upon suffering as essen-
tially the result of sin and justified by it. The importance of distinguishing the
gratia universalis from the grace of election which softens the doctrine of Original
Sin, accepts the fact of Reason and culture, gives room to theZ,*# Naturae , and
generally weakens the rigidly pessimistic and ascetic features ; see Bavinck in
Calvin and the Reformation , and also Kuyper,pp. 110-118. This side of the question,
which is usually overlooked, is very important for the problem of asceticism
and its relation to civilization.
818 (P* 585.) Cf. Hundeshagen , pp. 396 , 40 1, 447 , 448. On the intellectual
nature of Calvinism, see Choisy; L'ftat chritien , p. 323, and Kuyper, 103-331;
884 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the latter with an admixture of very powerful apologetic, highly characteristic
of the aims of modern Calvinism. Schneckenburger has some excellent passages
on the intellectual character, self-consciousness, and calm assurance of
Calvinism ; for the fact that this led to the acceptance of Western culture and
of Humanism by Calvinism which, in spite of its predominant pessimism and
asceticism, is much stronger than in Lutheranism, see Arnold: Calviwrede. The
higher position of spiritual and intellectual culture in Calvinism is also very
finely expressed in C. F. Meyer's Novelle iiber die Bartholomausnacht.
819 (p- 587*) On the great emphasis on the Bible in Lutheranism and
Calvinism, see Schneckenburger , 7, pp. 16, 20, 27; Otto Ritschl: Dogmengeschichte
des Prot.y 1908 , 7, 53-192 . Gobel, 77, 7/4, 754, 547, results for worship &nd song;
ii8j the form of worship, which is very simple and founded on the Bible,
resembles that of the Waldensians and the Moravians ; 7, 326 , Laski’s view of
the Bible “stands midway between the Lutherans with their lack of constitution
and the separatist Anabaptists’*; 311, the same tendency in Calvin, who in so
doing “also really attained the re-entrance of the separated Anabaptists which
since then in Geneva and in the whole Calvinistic Church scarcely happened
again (?), and then soon also they were tolerated in a way which never hap-
pened in the Zwinglian (and Lutheran) churches**. This ainalogy with the
Scriptural principles of the Baptists is very clearly recognized by A. Ritschl:
Gesch. d. Pietismus> 7, 72.
320 (p- 59°-) For the special character of Calvinistic individualism, see
Schneckenburger and especially Max Weber: Archiv. XXI , pp. 5-14 , in which Weber
rightly points out the very different meaning which the word “individualism**
can be used to cover. It may mean the mediaeval freedom of movement and
the variety of graduated relationships along with a relative equality in the
spiritual content of life, or the modern consciousness and sense of difference
with the greatest possible equality in the legal and social sphere, or Catholic
mysticism and Catholic liberalism, or Lutheran happiness of justification, or
the self-concentration and self-control of Calvinism. Calvinism is characterized
not by an increased individualism, but by a particular kind of individualism ;
see Weber , p. 12 , also cf. Rieker , p. 72, and Seeberg: Begriff der Kirche , 7, p. 123 ,
who, however, underestimate the connection between the effect of predestina-
tion and the ecclesiastical means of grace, because they think that tjie later
Independents and the sects were derived directly from Calvinistic individualism.
This, however, in view of its Church conception, which it borrowed from
Luther directly, is impossible. For Calvin the Church and predestination are
in no way rival forces, and the conception of the Church is placed within the
setting of predestination. From the ethical point of view, however, this
individualism always has more touch with that of the sects. But although the
legalistic spirit, the emphasis on the will, the derivation of fellowship from
the association of individuals, brings Calvinism very near to the sects and
increases the spirit of individualism, this sense of individualism is again
removed by the conception of grace which gives rise to the doctrine of pre-
destination. Schneckenburger has brilliantly opened up this subject, and shown
the interplay of both these tendencies. He was also the first to notice the
resemblance to the sect, 7, 26: “The external Church has almost only necessitas
praecepti and it very nearly rejects them quite in the sectarian manner’* ; 50: “The
far greater significance of the institutional character of the Church for the
Lutherans** ; 157: “The Church does not make the believers what they are,
but the believers make the Church what she is ; this is the principle expressed
in a very outspoken way by Vinet, and is directly opposed to the Lutheran
PROTESTANTISM
885
conception of the Mother Church’ * ; 167: “It was and is always the practical
way of sect-formation through which certain inconsistencies in doctrine, and
more frequently merely ascetic or disciplinary discords, are resolved.” Cf.,
however, also the reverse side of this question in the section on the Unio cum
Christo , /, 133-143 , where the removal of these consequences by the doctrine
of Predestination and of Grace is described.
328 (p* 593*) On this point his work, Contre les Anabaptistes , C. R. 33, is very
important. In this work Calvin treats the conservative branch of the Baptist
movement on the whole very leniently, only blaming them in a condescending
manner for their foolishness and lack of culture. He admits especially that so
far as the* demand for a holy community and excommunication is concerned,
there is a common standpoint which the Baptists also had gained from the
Bible, and he only opposes their atomistic separatism, their tendency to regard
solely the moral worth of the individual, and their subjectivism which overlooks
the objectivity of grace and their hostility to culture. So far Calvin, in fact,
accepts the early Lutheran group ideal ( W . Kohler: Christl. Welt, 1907, pp. 371-
377), and he corresponds to the tendencies of a lay Christian Puritanism as it
has been called by Barge. Only it should be emphasized very strongly that
Calvin did not to reach that ideal of the holy community from the stand-
point of lay Christianity and the priesthood of believers, but through setting
up a supernatural Church-order based on the Scriptures, which is of Divine
authority. He also removed the question of appointment to, and control of,
the ministry from the congregation, handing it over to the general body of
the pastors and to the Council, leaving to the congregation only the right of
protest. The lay elders also were elected by the pastors and the Council, they
were not chosen by the congregation, and they had a semi-clerical character ;
see Choisy: L’tiat chrHien , p. 336. Attempts at a more far-reaching congregational
democracy were suppressed by the pastors ( Choisy , 79, 149 , 133). Certainly the
fundamental idea of Calvinism was the purity of the body of communicants,
based upon Pauline teaching, only this purity was maintained on ecclesiastical,
authoritative lines, not on those of a sectarian lay religion. On that account,
because all exclusion was effected by the State-clerical institution of discipline
and had civil consequences, the celebration of Holy Communion was always
an act b*>th of the municipal community and of the Church at the same time
{Choisy, 338) . Only thus did Geneva become the “Holy City”, the “New Jeru-
salem”, as men liked to call it {Choisy, 430, 436). This, together with the different
attitude towards culture, is the difference between primitive Calvinism and the
New Jerusalem of the Baptists at Munster; in contrast with Luther it is the
supernatural character of the Calvinistic Church-order which made possible
the erection of a stable community and kept it in close touch with the Church-
type, whereas Luther in the rejection of that “new law” in reality would have
been at the mercy of congregational democracy and the sect-type, if he had
followed his earlier plans out in detail, or if he could have done so. Only in
France, when congregations were set up which were free from the State, did
the congregations begin to elect the elders (. Briefe , II, 469) ; for the Palatinate
Calvin had outlined a mixed system of election ( 413 ). The election of pastors,
however, lay always in the hands of the pastors {II, 330). Further, democratic
tendencies towards lay Christianity, the election of pastors and elders by the
congregation, discussions on the sermon into which the congregation was
drawn, which indeed closely resembled the Baptist communities, which
became so important for the Netherlands and the Lower Rhine {Joh. a . Laski ,
see in Gobel, I, 318-331, 412).
886 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
834 (p* 594*) The illustrations of this question are in Schneckenburger , Choisy ,
and Gobel. The purity of the body of communicants as the main point,
Schneckenburger , 1 , 64 ff.; Gobel , II, 75; baptism as an obligation, Gobel, I, 122,
J 75ff’j Schneckenburger, I, 254. The connection between these ideas of excom-
munication, the purity of the body of communicants, and baptism, with the
Baptist movement, and the tendency (which was also present in Calvinism)
from this point of view to break down the ecclesiastical spirit altogether, is
emphasized a good deal by Gobel, I, 88-99 : “Since for other and more impor-
tant reasons this separation did not take place, because it was considered
desirable to maintain itself as a Church and not to become a sect, there
remained, therefore, in all the congregations a great deal, and in some every-
thing to be done in order to reach even to some extent the high aim of a true
congregation consisting only of believers.” I, in, scruples against Infant
Baptism and the oath; 113, Labadism and Pietism only opposed because their
effect is sectarian; 211, central significance of the home rather than of the
congregation, because the former is more capable of being really Christianized.
836 (p. 595.) On this spirit of legalism, see Schneckenburger , I, 109-131;
Lobenstein, 51-37; Inst,, II, 7, 6-9; here the statement, II, 7, 12: “Tertius usus
legis, qui est praecipuus et in proprium legis finem propius spectat, erga
fideles locum habet, in quorum cordibus jam viget et regnat dei Spiritus.”
The law does not serve chiefly to make sin known as in Lutheranism, but it
regulates the behaviour of the individual who has been born again ; therefore,
in the Calvinistic Catechisms law does not precede but follows faith. This has
nothing to do with Catholicism, for obedience springs out of faith, but with
the strictness of a holy community ; it is combined with predestination through
the idea of perseverance and the doctrine (which Calvin himself rejected) of
the signs of the state of grace. On this point, in addition to Schneckenburger , see
Gobel, II, 137, 145, 206, 215. The only analogy is the legalism of the Baptists,
whose moralism, however, is set aside by Calvinism by tracing everything back
to predestination.
837 (p. 596.) On this point see the brilliant sections in Schneckenburger on the
mystical indwelling ( 1 , 182-255). Christ as Lord and Law-giver (I, 126); the
Lord in Whom the Church is planted (I, 136). Of course, I do not mean that
we are here confronted with an historical influence of the Baptists, blit simply
with the consequence of an idea which Calvinism held in common with the
Baptists. The same consequences, the same effects. At the same time the
difference which arises out of the rest of the assumptions on both sides is quite
clear. It is, however, remarkable that so far as I know no one has pointed out
this resemblance before. Choisy , certainly, points frequently to the Christo-
cratic conception which distinguishes Calvinism from Lutheranism.
838 (p. 597.) On the Covenant idea, see Schneckenburger, I, 159; Gobel , I, 385 ,
already Olevian in Heppe , 205-240. That this is the root of Calvinist Free
Church development is shown by Gobel, 401; 418, the Church on the
Lower Rhine ; 423, a voluntary Church based on personal confession of faith
and personal obligations; 443, the resemblance of this idea of the Church
to that of the sect fully recognized. In consequence of this, the idea of the
germ of the Church existing within the Church ; Gobel, II, 71, closed and open
communities ; II, 415, two congregations in each parish. Gdbel emphasizes in
this the transition to Pietism just as Coccejus, with his Covenant theology,
did more for Pietism than Voet with his organization of Conventicles in which
Coccejus did not share. Coccejus has done more to break up the idea of the
Church inwardly and spiritually through the idea of the Covenant than the
PROTESTANTISM 887
orthodox Voet, who only wished to help Church discipline through his
Conventicles.
8#0 (P* 59 ®*) Gf. Choisy : La Thiocratie. Here and in Sckneckenburger genuine
ecclesiastical Calvinism is described ; in Choisy that of the Genevans and of
Calvinism; in Sckneckenburger that of orthodoxy. Gobel , however, whose sym-
pathies were Calvinistic and Pietist, points out everywhere the connections
with Pietism, which were in harmony with his own sympathies, for which
reason also he often detects resemblances between primitive Calvinism and
the sect-type. For this reason his book is very instructive, whereas otherwise,
even in Sckneckenburger , the legal and ascetic features of Calvinism are often
attributed to Catholicism. It is, however, true that Sckneckenburger likes to
make his subject more intelligible by using illustrations from Methodism,
Quakerism, Pietism, and Puritanism. — For the ecclesiastical nature of
Calvinism which remained in spite of all this, see Choisy , p . 262 : “Calvin does
not admit that man is free ; he excludes this idea from his theological, and
from his social system. The Kingdom of God is not offered to man to be freely
accepted ; it is established by persuasion, no doubt, but also by the repression
of all rebellion by constraint. Calvin does not admit that the glory of God
consists in offering His Sovereign Will to the will of man, who accepts it
freely or who denies it, who obeys or who resists it, who gives himself or refuses
to do so. For him the glory of God is maintained when man bows down before
His law in an attitude of submission whether free or forced. Sins against God
and His Word are considered violations of the law.” This applies equally to the
elect and the reprobate. Here is the main difference between Calvinism
proper and every form of Free Church and Pietistic modification or accentua-
tion of Calvinism, and also of all forms of sectarianism. — The connection
which still exists between both, in spite of all that, is also recognized by Luthardt:
Gesch. der christl. Ethik , II: “However vigorously Calvin tries to disclaim any
connection with the Anabaptists, the connection with that twofold way of
thinking (spiritual mysticism and the legalistic holy community) cannot be
denied. And although at the beginning perhaps it was unconscious, it was later
quite consciously expressed and made to count.” The matter is still more
clearly recognized by Ritschl: Geschichte des Pietismus , /, 61-98, in which also
the different attitude of Lutheranism towards excommunication and Church
discipline is made very clear. Cf. /, pp. 7 and 96 . RitschPs argument that this
resemblance to the sect-type is due to its French revolutionary, equalitarian
popular character, is certainly more characteristic of the Prussian conservative
Ritschl than it is of Calvin. The Lutheran Ritschl, who exalts so highly the
Lutherans because they regard the Church in an objective sense, cannot even
imagine that such things are simply Christian, that is, that they represent an
indestructible element of primitive Christian thought. Further, in Calvin there
is no question of “equality”.
881 (p. 601.) For Calvin’s ideal of heroism and its conscious connection with
Platonism (probably also and still more with Stoicism), see the section in the
book mentioned below by Beyerhaus , pp. 153-155 . Calvin’s Humanism is cer-
tainly coloured by the ethic of Stoicism, much more deeply than Melancthon’s
merely Scholastic Humanism. He is the most Humanist of the Reformers;
see Arnold , pp. // ff. Cf. also the analysis of the commentary on Seneca's De
Clementia in Beyerhaus , 1-25. In his ethic it seems possible to discern the effect
of Humanism and of juristic thought to the same extent in which one discerns
in Luther’s ethic the influence of monasticism.
888 (p. 602.) In Calvin there is no distinction as there is in Luther between
888 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
personal and official morality. Calvin has, it is true, Luther’s formulas; cf.
Contre les Anabaptistes , CR. 55, p . 77 : “Or il est vray qu’en particular l’usage
du glaive ne doit estre permis a nul pour faire resistence au mal. Car les armes
des Chrestiens sont prieres et mansuetude, pour posseder leurs vies en patience
et vaincre le mal en bien faisant selon la doctrine de PEvangile Luc. 21, 19.
Rom. 12, 21. L’office de chacun de nous est de souffrir patiemment si on nous
fait quelque outrage plus tot qui d’user de force et violence. Mais de condamner
le glaive publique, lequel Dieu a ordonne pour nostre protection, c’est un
blaspheme contre Dieu mesme.” There is a similar passage in Lobstein,p . 121.
But the opposition between the legal order and its spirit of punishment and
authority, its connection with the struggle for existence against the purely
voluntary order of love, has been quite lost. The legal order is solely a useful
member appointed by God in the upbuilding of rational society as already in
the Old Testament. This comes out most plainly and in an almost identical
manner in the Calvinist exposition of the Sermon on the Mount, whose results
are gathered up in the work Contre les Anabaptistes , C.R. , 35, in the Institutio,
IV, 20, 17-22, and in the exposition of the Decalogue, II, 8. The Sermon on the
Mount is to be understood in the light of the Old Testament as an expression
of the unchangeableness of God ; Christ has added nothing,to it and altered
nothing, but since He has not opposed the social and legal order of the Old
Testament He has confirmed it ; all that He did oppose were the misinterpreta-
tions of the Pharisees. Therefore even the harsh laws against adultery belong
to the law of Christ. Inst. ,11, 8, 26: “Christo non est institutum legem aut laxare
aut restringere, sed ad veram ac germanicam intelligentiam reducere, quae
falsis Scribarum et Pharisaeorum commentis valde depravata fuerant.” Thus
from this point of view the oath, law, tyranny, war, and possessions are
regarded as permitted by the Sermon on the Mount. Also the practical interests
of Society require an exposition of this kind ; cf. Beza’s opinion about the death
penalty for double adultery ( Choisy , p. 185) : “Et ce d’autant que pour punir
ce crime capitalement, il faut avoir esgard non seulement k l’impudicite, mais
aussi et principalement k l’interest de la society humaine, laquelle ne peut
subsister si la distinction des families, heritages et successions n’cst conserve,
ce qui rend ce crime naturellement capital, comme expose tres bien Mr. Calvin
sur l’histoire de Juda, Genes. 28, 24.” The story of the woman taken in adultery
is interpreted in a different sense. Thus Calvin sees in the Sermon on the
Mount simply the use of civil ordinances and law without personal hatred and
passion for the objective end of the securing of the law and of the protection
of Society (Inst. IV, 20, 18, and R. 35, p. 44). Calvin knows that even that is
difficult and rarely happens. This is all undoubtedly practical and sensible,
but the whole feeling is quite different from that of Luther’s ethic. The reason
for the different conception lies in this that the ethic of Calvin does not have
its central point in the free outpouring of love, but in purity of conscience and
in heroism and self-denial for the setting up of the Christian community.
Love in the meaning of Luther is not its fundamental conception ; hence it feels
no opposition between love and law and force, see Choisy: La Thiocratie, p. 258.
On this point Calvin himself speaks very plainly. The sum-total of ethics is to
him (Brief e, II, 100), “that we are strong in hope and in endurance, that we are
self-restrained and sober in the avoidance of worldly lusts, that we give great
pains to control the passions of the flesh, that the endeavour after righteousness
and piety live in us strongly, that we are earnest and eager in prayer, that the
thought of eternal life should draw us upwards.” Of Moses he says, charac-
teristically (II, 221 ) : “Whence he gained his strength, namely, because he *
PROTESTANTISM
889
became firm, through gazing upon God.” The Theologia Germanica , which
Luther prized so highly, Calvin rejects “as a prating of the devil, which has
been made by his cunning in order to confound the simplicity of the Gospel”
(//, 258). — In a very special way he expresses himself on the subject of love in
writing to Renata of Ferrara (II, 470 ff.) in order to defend hatred of evil;
Renata especially did not wish to see her brother-in-law, the murdered Duke
of Guise, insulted, and Calvin writes as follows: “To my observation, that
David teaches us by his example to hate our enemies (Ps. xxxi. 7, and clxi. 3),
you say that that was at the time when under the rigid law it was still per-
mitted to hate one’s enemy. Now, madam, an exposition of that kind could
overthrow* the whole of Scripture, and therefore we must avoid it like deadly
poison. For we see that David exceeded the very best men that we could find
to-day. ... If, however, he says that he cherishes a deadly hatred of the
reprobate, so doubtless he is boasting of his right pure ardour, which is quite
in order if the following three conditions are fulfilled : ( 1) that we do not draw
ourselves and our own personal interest into the matter; (2) that we act with
wisdom and foresight and do not judge lightly; (3) that we are restrained and
do not go beyond that to which we are called. You can read more on this
subject in several passages of my exposition of the Psalms. Precisely on that
account even has the Holy Ghost given David to us as a kind of patron saint
that we should follow his example. It is, indeed, actually told us that in his
zeal he was a type or a foreshadowing of our Lord Jesus Christ ; see Ps. lxix. 10,
and John ii. 17. Do we then want to exceed Him who is the source of all sym-
pathy and mercy in gentleness and kindness? If we do, woe to us ! Let us make
an end of all explanations: we then will be content that St. Paul applies
particularly this exhortation to all believers that the zeal for the house of God
shall eat them up (Ps. lxix. 10 and Rom. xv. 3). . . . The method (against a
false conception of love) is this : to hate evil, but not to think simply of indi-
viduals, but to leave each to his own judge.” — This is an example of the positive
and impersonal character of the Calvinist ethic. To this also belongs the
exposition of the renunciation of revenge in Hoornbeck, quoted by Weber ,
XXI, p. 13 : “Denique doc magis ulciscimur, quo proximum, inultum nobis,
tradimus ultori Deo. Quo quis plus se ulciscitur, eo minus id pro ipso agit
Deus !”A similar example on p. 32. Here we are worlds apart from Lutheranism.
Characteristic also is the passage which Beyerhaus quotes from C.R. , 57, 143 :
“Car en cela monstrerez . . . vous que vous estes vrais zelateurs du service de
Dieu, quand vous tuerez vos propres fibres, et que rien ne sera espargn£ : que
l’ordre de nature sera mis sous le pied, pour monstrer que Dieu domine par
dessus tout, et qu’il a son degr6 souverain.” For Luther the natural order of
love (in its perfection in the Primitive State) was identical with the Divine
Law of morality ; Calvin, however, under some circumstances makes a distinc-
tion between the Natural Law of love and the positive Divine Law of the
unconditional glorification of the sovereignty of God. This leads also this
ethic back to the fundamental difference in the conception of God. — In any
case this is a quite different spirit from that of the Lutheran ethic and also
from that of the New Testament. Calvin finds Scriptural justification for it in
the Old Testament, which, therefore, for this purpose he reads into the New
Testament. His fundamental idea is the fulfilment of the eternal unchangeable
law through the grace of election in the new Israel which is formed by Christ.
Choisy emphasizes this fully everywhere. I would only add that without this
Calvin’s practical work would have been quite impossible, just as impossible
as that of Luther actually became. From the point of view of the New Testa-
890 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
ment it is impossible to effect any direct change in the world. The whole
of this previous inquiry has shown us this and Calvin’s use of the Old Testament,
for all that is practically important, is only a further proof of this statement.
Even to-day we have the same interpretation in, for example, Rauschenbusch:
Christianity and the Social Crisis , 1904 ; in which the writer argues that the teaching
of Jesus was drawn from the Old Testament prophets and His Kingdom of
God from the prophetic ideal of Society, and he describes the Church as
apostate because she has fallen a prey to the mystical individualism of the
Greek spirit ! For all political and social matters Calvin appeals, in fact, to the
Old Testament ; see Rieker , /, 234, 343, 393, 403. Cf. Choisy: L'itat chritien , 156 ff.
833 (p. 602.) This emphasis on Christian Socialism above all® in Choisy:
La Theocratic, 244 and 278. Only here does Christianity become consciously and
systematically social after it had followed a very devious or fanatical course of
development among the Anabaptists and the sects. Cf. above, pp . 82 and 423 .
Also at this point we see more clearly the resemblance between Calvinism and
the sect-movement as well as its limits. Calvinism understands Christian
Socialism as a life-unity of Church and State ( Choisy , 230-234) and modifies
the over-idealistic standards of the sect to practical common sense. That is
why Calvinism and Calvinism alone has been successful c in a far-reaching
education of peoples. Choisy , 203: “The Protestant peoples are there in order
to show that the ecclesiastical and social work of Calvin, his colossal effort
to realize upon earth the social ideal of the Kingdom of God, have not been
in vain.” This primitive Calvinistic Christian Socialism differs from modern
Christian Socialism by its predominantly ethical and ideological character,
whereas the Christian Socialism of the present day is based upon the economic
historical and technological foundation of modern social theory. At that time
such things were scarcely thought of at all because circumstances did not make
it necessary. Calvinism, however, even then was concerned with the question
of the material economic substructure of the ethical life, and it knew the
value of statistics. Of this more anon. — On this Christian social feature down
to the present day there are admirable observations in Karl Hartmann: Englische
Frommigkeit , eine Studie , 1910 ( Beilage zum Jahresbericht des prot. Gymnasiums zu
Strassburg). This work contains a great deal of illuminating material about
Calvinism and the sects, and everywhere it confirms the point of view which
is here presented.
836 (p. 604.) A number of examples in Kampschulte and Choisy. Unfortunately
Schneckenburger gives no analysis of this. Like so many other thinkers, in this
legalism he only sees the rigorism of a spirit which approaches dependence on
“works”. He lays stress upon the fear of exaltation of creatures, on the rational
and methodical systematic nature of Calvinist behaviour; and the relation to
the future happiness with the constant tension of aiming at a goal in the future
life which contrasts strongly with Lutheranism and its sense of security in the
present life and its happy faith. Only he makes no attempt to understand these
ideas in connection with Christian asceticism and its history. Also in Luthardt:
Geschichte der christlichen Ethik this does not happen. The theologians in their
treatment of ethics almost always discuss simply problems of form, that is,
of the basis or sanction, and the source of energy or of religious power, but not
the content or the aim of morality. This aim, however, in an ethic which over
against the world which is lost and corrupt by Original Sin and wishes to
secure the happiness of heaven, is ascetic. And at this point the Calvinistic
ethic, contrasted with the Lutheran, is much more dualistic, more systematically
directed towards the other life and the depreciation of this life, without.
PROTESTANTISM 8 9 t
however, taking away the value of this life altogether, but in order to use it.
Ritschl , in his acute way, has described Calvinistic asceticism as “a clear
approximation to the monastic withdrawal from the world” ( Geschichte des
Pietismus , /, 76) ; it is the attitude of “Franciscan Tertiaries”. “So far as the
Christian ideal of life of Calvinism is anti-Catholic, this is due to Luther’s
influence; so far as it departs from Luther’s conception it goes back again
into line with the Franciscan ideal of life.” P. 78 : “Ascetic holiness, namely,
strict rejection of all worldly recreation and of all games.” The derivation
and description of the ideas of this Calvinist “asceticism” arc, however, quite
inadequate in this book; indeed, it is almost comic ( p . 76). A penetrating
conceptuaf analysis has only been given by Max Weber ; see especially Archiv .
XXI , 73. Gobel gives a mass of examples and analyses the subject less clearly:
/, 444-448 , resolutions of Synods ; here ( p . 447) the asceticism of the “calling” ;
“a Christian shall use the time which he still has to live in a serious manner
(that means without pleasures), faithfully fulfil his ‘calling’, and otherwise in
his leisure time he ought to fill the time with God-fearing conversations,
taking great care to avoid books of fables and to read aloud from the Holy
Scriptures and other hallowed treatises”; II, 72, self-description of the
Calvinistic members of the Church as “Christians”, while all the others are
called “children of the world” ; II, 47, further resolutions of the Synods against
pleasures, even against those which the Government has instituted and expects
to be used; II, 103: “the Calvinists are distinguished by an earnest piety and
a strict morality, by a careful observance of the First Table of the Law, by
great honesty and sobriety, especially in relation to public pleasures (dances,
Church consecrations, shooting festivals, banquets, theatres), and through the
frugality and order, industry and honesty which is connected with that way
of living.” The characteristic element is everywhere unlimited industry with
solely spiritual recreation, the cutting down of the sense-life to the unavoidable
minimum, but without bodily injury or mortification, the purely utilitarian
treatment of all secular things as mere means and the exclusion of all that is
earthly from this aim, the methodical and systematic discipline and direction
towards a final end in the other life. In all these things Lutheranism is much
more lax, spontaneous, instinctive, and, above all, less logical. The attitude of
Lutheraiysm in these things is, above all, one of absence of theory and lack
of logic, just as its whole ethic with its repetition of justification is not directed
towards a logical end, but towards the enjoyment of the salvation offered us in
Christ in each experience. Schneckenburger has developed this latter point in a
very striking way; see also my review of Hoennicke in GGA., 1902. It is true that
Lutheranism knew sufficient about denial of the world; cf. these words of
Luther quoted by Schneckenburger : “Weeping goes before works, and suffer-
ing is a greater thing than all we do.” The question is, “Sese passibilem Deo
praestare,” man must become clay in the hands of God who will mould him.
Even where in the older books of doctrine good works are specified, he only
knows “abnegatio sui, toleratio crucis” and “precatio” (/, 140) ; this passage
shows at the same time the difference between Lutheranism and the active
asceticism of Calvinism. The idea of “intramundane asceticism”, which is
here used, is already found in G obel, III , 334 : “The Roman Catholic external
renunciation of the world and external system of sanctification contrasted
with the Evangelical inward overcoming of the world and joy and peace in
believing.” This simply means the same thing expressed by Weber and myself
as the opposition between an asceticism apart from or within the world, which,
however, it is easier for a Pietist to understand and value than for a rigid
892 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Churchman like Ritschl or even a Rationalist like Rachfahl. — Further, see
the article entitled Askese ( geschichtlich ) by Heussi in Schiele's Lexikon , which
follows my point of view. The article entiled Askese (ethisch), by Scheel at least
instinctively distinguishes the two main tendencies which I discern of the
metaphysical and the disciplinary kind of asceticism; otherwise he has not
recognized sufficiently the special character of Christian asceticism; the
asceticism of Buddhism, Neo-Platonism, of fanatical and ritual cults, is some-
thing quite different. Christianity, when it found that the world was going to
last and that it must renounce the idea of the miraculous coming of the
Kingdom of God, was obliged necessarily to transfer the spirit of tension
directed towards the other world to another part of its world of feeling. Thus
its asceticism arose, but it was a Christian asceticism, and it is always important
to distinguish clearly between its own nature and the various influences
from outside which have affected it (from Neo-Platonism, paganism, etc.).
Scheel , from his modern immanental standpoint, questions whether Pro-
testantism is justified in retaining the conception of asceticism at all ; he says,
however: “I have not been able to find a sure opinion about asceticism in
general which would correspond with its fundamental religious and ethical
convictions.’ * Certainly, and for good reasons. “Intramuiedane asceticism”
is, indeed, from both points of view, Lutheran and Calvinistic, not so easy to
justify, and yet in both confessions its main ideas are present. Here the resolute
dualism of Catholicism is easier to justify. The inner complication of Pro-
testantism, its position between Immanence and Transcendence, between a
pessimism which regards the whole world as lost in sin and the acceptance of
the world, emerges clearly particularly in its idea of asceticism. That is why
it is so difficult to conceive this idea clearly. Where, however, within Protes-
tantism asceticism is clearly emphasized and required, there appears the
dangerous element which this important factor contains by reason of its
indefinite character. The tendency of asceticism within Protestantism is
always towards breaking away from the Church, whether in the sectarian or
the mystical and idealist sense, since asceticism in Protestantism is not placed
under the control of the Church or of a religious order, but it is an entirely
voluntary matter or the personal duty of the individual. — The latter anti-
authoritative effect of asceticism (Max Weber: Archiv. XXI , 65 ff . , 99), has been
recognized pre-eminently by Ritschl . Thus actually in Calvinism it leads to
Pietism, as Ritschl rightly discerns. Ritschl 1 s own conception of Lutheranism
as a glorification and moulding of the world in one’s “calling”, made possible
through trust in God and the happiness of justification, is certainly a highly
modernized Lutheranism which allows the dualistic ascetic and pessimistic
elements in trust in God, that is, in truth under the influence of modern ideas
of Immanence, to disappear. That which he regards as the heart of Lutheran,
and therefore of genuine, Christianity, namely, trust in God, which is based
upon the ecclesiastical objective means of grace, and which makes possible both
different degrees of active holiness and adaptation to the world in popular
Christianity, docs not occupy in any sense a prominent place in the early
sources, and also has only been brought to light by Ritschl as their unconscious
presupposition, which was hidden behind doctrinaire ideas.
887 (p. 608.) Rachfahl , in his attack upon Weber and myself ( Calvinismus und
Kapitalismus , Internationale Wochenschrift, 1909) , has felt able, by appealing to
some encyclopaedia articles, to treat the conception of “intramundane
asceticism” in a very condescending manner. But he understands nothing at
all of theological matters ; I believe that what I have written is sufficient in
PROTESTANTISM
893
order to justify afresh the use of a conception which must have some kind of
name and which modern Rationalists — theological and non-theological — do
not understand at all. When Rachfahl appeals to Loofs: Luthers Stellmg, pp. 21 ff.,
Loofs is there only opposing the opinion that because such asceticism exists,
Protestantism must be relegated to the Middle Ages, and is, therefore, of no
further use for the modern man. This, however, is not my view in any sense,
as Loofs himself knows, since he thinks that if I had had more opportunities
I would have shown more understanding for asceticism. Loofs interprets what
I have said about Luther’s connection with the Middle Ages as valuejudgments,
which they are not meant to be at all. That Luther “got stuck” in the Middle
Ages was fieither the expression I used nor is it my opinion. I emphasized
only the difference compared with the modern world as it actually is; and
there is no doubt that in its practice and its theory the modern world has very
little room for asceticism. But in saying this I am not giving a value judgment
upon asceticism in itself. The mediaeval world contained many elements which
are still live issues at the present time, and the ascetic elements which the
Reformers held in common with the mediaeval period contained permanent
problems and vital interests which will certainly return once more, although
in a completely different form. I would refer my readers to Jakob Burkhardt's
Weltgeschichtliche Betrachtungen, one of the deepest and most thoughtful books of
recent times. My difference with Loofs is related in reality to the question
of the unity and extension of modern thought. I regard this as a much bigger
question than Loofs does, and I consider that the situation of the Church is
far more serious than he does ; see my article, Die Entstehung des modernen Geistes
in Preuss. Jahrb., 1906. In the question of simple facts about the nature of
Protestant asceticism on the contrary, I believe that I am, upon the whole, in
agreement with Loofs. — Rachfahl , in his second statement ( JW., 1910) Nochmals
Calvinismus und Kapitalismus, declares that he thinks it wise to withhold con-
fidence in my statements about asceticism until they have been accepted by
Loofs , Kawerau , Kattenbusch , Scheel, and Lang. To some extent these men are
outstanding scholars, but at this particular point of the definition of Catholicism,
Lutheranism, Calvinism, and the Baptist movement with the assistance of the
conception of asceticism, they are all under the influence of the well-known
ideas of Ifytschl, which, closely connected with theological confessional value
judgments, have, in my opinion, a quite wrong orientation. Further, those
scholars themselves would certainly dissociate themselves from RachfahVs
banal observations about asceticism {pp. J28JJ.).
838 (p. 609.) Cf. Inst., Ill , 7, 1-2; Lobstein, pp. 79 ff. f 86 , and especially
108-112 : “If we are to live we must have the necessary means of life. Also we
cannot avoid that which leads more to pleasure than is absolutely necessary.
We ought to observe a spirit of true moderation which must be determined
by the thought that life is a pilgrimage towards heaven.” “Our principle
ought to be to use goods for the purpose for which God has created them.
But He did not create them merely for necessity, but also in order to give
pleasure. He has thought of the desire of the senses since He has created
flowers and has given to gold and silver, ivory and marble, a beauty and a
brilliance which makes these metals and stones more costly and valuable than
others.” “Thus, then, the best and the safest path to pursue is to subordinate
this present life to the eternal ; we ought to enjoy life as though we did not
enjoy it ; we must learn to endure poverty patiently and wealth in moderation ;
we must guard ourselves against turning those things which are the means of
this life into hindrances for the eternal life. Secondly, we must beware against
894 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
thinking too much of earthly goods ; this tendency shows itself both in the
flight from poverty and lowliness as in honour and desire for gain. Thirdly, we
must always remember that we have to give an account of our use of earthly
goods. Finally, God wishes us in all the deeds of our life to regard our ‘calling*
in order to judge our actions by this standard and to orientate our lives by it.**
I give the following extract from a sermon in which science and art are treated
according to these principles : “Quand un homme sera le plus exquis en science
qu*on sauroit imaginer, si faut-il que nous apprenions de nous humilier, et
que toute hautesse soit mise bas, que le savoir humain que Dieu nous aura
donn6 pour lui servir, soit assujett6& sa parole.** It is the same with eloquence.
“Vray est que tous les deux procedent de la pure bont6 de Dieu. Mdis si faut-il
venir 1 k, que celui qui sera parvenu k la vraye clart6 celeste, die, Je suis tien,
Seigneur ; et tout ce que tu m*as donn£, aussi vient de toy : que tu le revives
dono sur tout : puisque tu m’as fait la grace de estre instruit par ta parole, fay
que tout le reste rende l’honneur et l’hommage tel que il appartient k ceste
science admirable, que j*ai apprinse en ton escole. . . . Dieu a ressuscite les
sciences humaines qui sont propres et utiles k la conduite de nostre vie, et,
en servant k nostre utility, peuvent aussi servir k sa gloire. . . . Nulle bonne
science n’est repugnante k la crainte de Dieu ni k la doctrine qu*il nous donne
pour nous mener en la vie eternelle, moyennant que nous ne mettions point
la charrue devant les beufs ; c*est k dire que nous ayons ceste prudence de
nous servir des artzs tout liberaux que mechaniques en passant par ce monde
pour tendre tousiours au Royaume celeste.** Cf. also G. Lasch: Calvin und die
Kunsl , Christliches Kunstblatt, igog , in which the differences between Calvin and
Luther in this sphere come out very clearly. This also reveals their attitude
towards the Renaissance. Only when we recognize this use of earthly means
with reference to a heavenly purpose is it right to describe the meditatio futurae
vitae as the central point of Calvin’s ethic ; see M. Schulze : Med . fut vitae im
System Calvins , igoi. Further, Lobstein points out that in his struggles at
Geneva Calvin’s practice was more austere than his theory.
344 (p. 612.) Weber's treatise in reality does not aim merely at the derivation
of the capitalist spirit from the Calvinistic idea of vocation, but at the explana-
tion of the modern bourgeois way of life, within which the “capitalist spirit”
is only one element. He is concerned in the main with the modern character-
istics of the bourgeoisie, and not with the elements which modern capitalism
has inherited from the ancient world and from the later Middle Ages. Rachfahl
and Kurdt have not understood this in the least. For my part I would rate still
higher the difference which Weber emphasizes between Calvin and Calvinism,
which has played its part in the formation of the bourgeois way of life. I would
like to emphasize as an explanation of the “bourgeois” spirit in this later
Calvinism still more than Weber does the setting, the exclusion from the
official world, from feudalism, and from the right to hold large estates. But there
can be no doubt about the close connection between the “bourgeois spirit**
and later and present-day Calvinism. This has been made possible particularly
by the fact that Calvinism has reduced the Christian ethic from a spiritual
and Utopian ethic of love to one of strict fear of God, industry, faithfulness in
one’s calling, and honesty. The difference between this bourgeois ideal and
the feudal aristocratic world which was much happier with the authority
religions of Catholicism, Lutheranism, and Anglicanism, and whose morality
was inwardly entirely free from the democratic spirit of humanity (but also
from the really spiritual morality of love), is obvious; incidentally this is
expressed quite frankly now and again. Likewise, however, also the difference
PROTESTANTISM
895
from the morality of the ancients ; before me there lies a Jahrbuch fur die geistige
Bewegung , 1911, published by disciples of Stefan Georges, with an article by
Friedrich Gundolf on Wesen und Beziehung , in which the Protestant bourgeois ethic
and its secularized inheritance appear as the curse from which only a free,
autonomous development apart from any “calling”, but out of the unity of
body and spirit, can help the situation. Here the inconsistency is rightly felt
even though to me the argument seems practically hopeless. — On the question
of the Huguenots, see Marcks ; on its gradual development in the bourgeois
direction, see certain passages in Elster and Laveleye. Its peculiar character still
needs to be specially investigated. Max Weber scarcely touches it, and
Schneckenbt&ger not at all. It is, however, certainly more nearly related to the
genuine spirit of Calvinism than the bourgeois world of the Netherlands, the
Lower Rhine, England, and America. I do not know what the position is in
Scotland, where the nobility in particular took a great part in the Reformation
movement; in any case, however, very characteristically the nobility finally
went back into Anglicanism.
345 (p. 612.) Cf. Briefe , II, 267 : “More than two years ago, in a private
conversation, John Knox asked me what was my view about the regiment of
women. I answertd frankly that it was a departure from the original true
order of nature, and on that account that it must be regarded as one of the
penalties of the Fall, as, for instance, slavery.” Cf. also II, 13. — Further, with
reference to marriage: in the pure state of nature marriage was without
“libido”, but “accensa post lapsum libidine . . . illam ipsam conjugalem
societatcm in necessitatis remedium esse ordinatam, ne in effrenem libidinem
proruamus” (Inst., II, 8, 41). — The oath is a Divine appointment for the good
of Society under the conditions of evil which have been brought in by sin
(Contre les Anabaptistes , CR.,35, p. 98) ; likewise the power of the sword of princes
and governments (ibid., 78).— Further statements about the relative Law of
Nature, or, as it is here put (p. 84), about the “results of sin limited by the
universality of grace”, see in Kuyper , pp. 73-76, where Calvin shows himself
entirely as a supporter of the general teaching of the Church: “Through its
profound conception of sin Calvinism has merely laid the essential foundations
of the life of the State, and at the same time two things are impressed upon us :
(1) that V£e ought to accept the life of the State and the Government as means
of deliverance which are now absolutely necessary; (2) but also that we, in
virtue of our natural instinct, ought always to be on our guard against the
danger to our personal freedom which lies in the supreme authority of the
State” (p. 74). The new element lies in the second point, whose significance
will immediately be explained. There is a great deal of material (on the
relative Natural Law, however, only as suggestions,/?/?. 131-133) in the ex-
tremely careful and convincing work of G. Beyerhaus, Studien zur Staatsan-
schauung Calvins (Neue Beitrdge herausgegeben von Bonwetsch und Seeberg, VII), 1910 .
There are some passages also in the extremely superficial book by A. Lang:
Die Reformation und das Naturrecht (Beitrdge zur For derung christlicher Theologie),
1909, pp . 20-22. I cannot understand how in face of his own quotations Lang
can say that Calvin found no place for Natural Law in his system. For Calvin
this is simply a natural presupposition, and it permeates all his arguments
wherever this idea was present. In the Institutes naturally this takes place least
of all. Beyerhaus, p. 66, says very rightly : “If Lang had systematically studied
Calvin’s Commentaries, especially, for instance, the explanation of the
Decalogue, CR. 3 2, 261 ff. s as well as CR . 57, 554 ff. (also Beyerhaus, pp. 96 ff.,
and p . 137, nr. 4 b), he could scarcely have made the assertion that ‘the Natural
8 g6 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Law plays no part in Calvin’s judgment of legal and social conditions’, and
his whole verdict upon the meaning of the Lex Naturae for Calvin would have
been essentially altered.” The fact is that Lang has no insight into the inner
structure of the Christian Natural Law and its function for the idea of* a
Christian civilization. Hence also the quite wrong assertions about Luther,
who also is supposed to have seen nothing in Natural Law and the restriction
of the understanding of Natural Law to Melancthon. So he comes to make
the statement that the Natural Law is really contrary to the true view of
Luther and of Calvin, only in haste “for lack of a conception of the State
clearly formulated according to the fundamental ideas of Protestantism” (p.50 ),
it was taken over out of mediaeval Catholic theories which arose in Catholicism
“and therefore in error”, and were then adopted by Liberalism !
846 (p. 613.) This point of view is expressed in countless passages. The
doctrine of law and the Decalogue is introduced with the statement : “Porro
haec ipsa, quae ex duabus tabulis discenda sunt, quodam modo nobis dictat
lex ilia interior, quam omnium cordibus inscriptam et quasi impressam superius
dictum est. Proinde (quod turn hebetudini, turn contumaciae nostrae neces-
sarium erat) Dominus Legem scriptam nobis posuit: quae et certius testifi-
caretur, quod in lege naturali nimis obscurum erat, et mentrem memoriamque
nostram excusso torpore vividius feriret” (Inst., II, 8, /). “Nihil est vulgatius,
quam lege naturali hominem sufficienter ad rectam vitae normam institui.
Nos autem expendamus, quorsum indita haec legis notitia hominibus fuerit ;
turn protinus apparebit, quousque illos ad rationis veriratisque scopum
deducat” (II, 2, 22), Cf. also Brief e, II, 140. The same idea occurs also in
Gratian. The law is unchangeable and eternal for the future ; it was, however,
also unchangeable before Moses (see the sermon of Lobstein,pp. 59-62), hence
this unchangeableness of God means that there is no difference between the
law of Moses and that of the Sermon on the Mount, which, therefore, likewise
is a perfected form of the Natural Law (Contre les Anabaptistes, CR. 35, p. 95).
In Beza the expression is “Loy divine, naturelle et universelle”, or “R£gle
perpetuelle et infallible de toute justice”, or “Loy de Dieu et de nature”,
absolutely the Terminus technicus for the Decalogue ( Choisy : Vitat ckritien ,
pp. 180 ff., 294, 296) ; the history of the Old Testament as an illustration of the
Law of Nature in the interesting record of the Vintrable Compagnie ,in Choisy ,
pp. 179 ff. This is a further reason which justifies the use of the Old Testament. —
Cf. also the section on ordre de nature and jus naturae in Beyerhaus (pp. 66-76), the
Stoic extension of Natural Law into the animal world (pp. 148-152), and the
analysis of the commentary on Seneca (pp. 3ff.).
847 (p. 613.) The main passage in Inst., II, 8, 11. Pervading spirituality as
the nature of the First Table (Inst., II, 8, 16) : “Praecedat oportet vera religio,
qua in Deum viventem animi referantur, cujus cognitione imbuti ... in
omnibus vitae actionibus tamquam in unicum scopum aspirent.” Otherwise
the division into two parts belongs also to the Natural Law (Inst., II, 2, 24, and
Inst., IV, 20, 9) : “Officium magistratus extendi ad utramque legis tabulam,
si non doceret scriptura, ex profanis scriptoribus discendum esset : nullus enim
de magistratuum officio disseruit, qui non exordium faceret a religione et
divino cultu.”
348 (p. 613.) Inst., IV, 20, 8: “Magna hujus dispensations ratio posita est
in circumstantiis.” Here is the place of the “naturalis aequitas et officii ratio”
(Inst., IV, 20, //). “Libertas singulis gentibus relicta est condendi quas sibi
conducere providerint leges : quae tamen ad perpetuam illam caritatis regulam
(that is, the Law of God and of Nature) exigantur, ut forma quidem varient,
PROTESTANTISM
897
rationem habcant eandem. Nam barbaras et fcras leges . . . pro legibus
habendas minime censeo” (Inst,, IV, so , 15). Further material in paragraph 16 .
It is from this point of view that we can explain the positive peculiarities of the
Jewish and Roman law, which we would consider impossible to combine
( Choisy,pp . 184 and 514). Thus the historical development of states and of law, in
spite of all differences, is something which has been indirectly effected by God
through the natural causal nexus ; it is the ancient doctrine of God as the causa
remota of states, of law, and of constitutions : “Perinde istud valet, non humana
perversitate fieri, ut penes Reges et Praefectos alios sit in terris rerum omnium
arbitrium, sed divina providentia et sancta ordinatione, cui sic visum est, res
hominum moderari, quandoquidem illis adest ac etiam praeest in ferendis
legibus et judiciorum aequitate exercenda” (Inst., IV, so, 4). “Quodsi non in
unam dumtaxat civitatem oculum defigas, sed universum simul orbem
circumspicias ac contempleris vel aspectum in longiora saltern regionum spatia
diffundas, comperies profecto divina providentia illud non abs re comparatum,
ut diversis politiis regiones variae administrentur ,, (Inst., IV, so, 8). The
“institution of the government by God” is thus — apart from the supernatural
history of Israel — as in Luther, always conceived as mediated by Providence
and that means the natural causal nexus. It is the Stoic doctrine of Providence
and of the cosmos of the political and social world (see Beyerhaus , pp. 3, 71, iog,
6s, is?). Thus the apparent positive law goes back to Providence and the
Law of Nature: “Solent plerique nimis scrupulose inquirere quo quisque jure
adeptus sit imperium : atqui hoc solo contentos esse decet, quod videmus eos
praesidere” (CR., 83, 344). In this the historical and Natural Law point of
view is united.
349 (p. 613.) Passive obedience to the point of suffering : Briefe, II, 14, 64 ; also
Inst., IV, so, 1, and so, 35, especially so, 37: “Nunquam in animum nobis
seditiosae illae cogitationes venient, tractandum esse pro meritis regem”, or
“nihil refert, qua sit apud homines conditione, cujus gentis legibus vivas :
quando in rebus istis minime situm est Ghristi regnum.” Greatest respect for
the Government (Briefe, I, si 3; II, 80, iq8, sso, 367) , advantage of the Reforma-
tion that it supports the Government more than the Papists (II, 134). Lobstein,
104. Treatment of the masses in Luther’s style; Choisy , 330: “le peuple, qui
est une beste farouche et dangereuse”, p. 33s: “une beste k plusieurs testes”.
Frugality as an ideal of life (Inst., II, 8, 46). A main interest and favourite
expression of Galvin is the cogere in ordinem (see Beyerhaus, p. 63 ) ; passive
obedience and the exclusion of the mediaeval doctrine of popular sovereignty
(p. 97) ; but also a gradual modification of this doctrine of passive obedience
and increasing rationalism (pp. 133-139). In this there is reflected only the
inner contradiction within his whole theology, which on the one hand recog-
nizes to a great extent the rationalism of the Lex Naturae, and on the other hand
asserts the irrational character of the Divine Will. Calvin can say on the one
hand “ut voluntas ejus sit pro lege et pro ratione et pro summa justitiae
regula” (Beyerhaus, 63, CR., 68, 683) ; on the other hand he is able to identify
the law of revelation and the law of reason. Under the influence of the first
idea all government seems to be simply appointed by God, and the whole
duty of subjects seems to consist in the exercise of self-humiliation ; under the
influence of the second idea the authorities are bound by the Law of Nature,
and they are to be controlled by those who have called them to their office,
even to the extent of the complete removal of the idea of sovereignty from the
Government. This discord goes right through Calvin’s teaching ; as time went
on, however, the conception of the State became more rational (Beyerhaus, p. 88).
VOL. n. FF
898 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
350 (p. 613.) A harsh expression of opinion about the State in the Augustinian
and Lutheran sense (cf. above, pp . 566-568) we seek in vain. Everywhere and
directly ? ffcis regarded as a Divine institution. It is “sancta Dei ordinatio et
donum ex eorum genere, quae mundis munda esse possunt” ( Inst ., IV, so, 19).
It belongs to the absolutely necessary means of human existence : “Sin ita est
voluntas Dei, nos, dum ad veram pietatem adspiramus, peregrinari super
terram, ejus vero peregrinationis usus talibus subsidiis indiget; qui ipsa ab
homine tollunt, suam illi eripiunt humanitatem’* (IV, so, s). The State is
only considered from the point of view of its positive rational service to the
Church and Society. Here Calvin is speaking as a lawyer and a practical man,
in contrast with Luther, who was a monk and an idealist. — With reference to
property there are traces of certain specific Scholastic ideas. Cf. Beyerhaus, 76.
They are, however, of little practical significance. The Institutio says, simply :
“Sic enim cogitandum est, unicuique evenisse, quod possidet, non fortuita
sorte, sed ex distributione summi rerum omnium Domini* * ; thus, property is
regarded as a Divine institution, as well as the legal system which safeguards
property (CR., 35, p. 87). In his discussions with the Anabaptists, where one
might expect an explanation of primitive communism, he only says : “De ce
qu’aucuns d’entre eux ont tenu touchant la communaut£ des biens, item
qu’un homme peut avoir plusieurs femmes et mille autres absurdites : je me
d6porte d*en toucher. Car eux mesmes, estant confuz en leur follies, s’en sont
retire tout bellement pour la piupart” (CR., 35, p. 103 ). He considers the
Baptists well-meaning fools who do not know the world, and are arrogant
expounders of the Bible, who follow their popular fantasies. “Je demande & ces
bons docteurs, que deviendra le monde !** (CR., 35, pp. 87 and 92) ; and if they
think that among true Christians law and authority are unnecessary Calvin
says simply: “e’est une resverie!” Practical life is impossible without the order
of the State and of law, since there are so many unavoidable errors and obscuri-
ties in life, even when there is nothing wrong. For the way in which the State
(without sin) is supposed to have developed as a patriarchal world empire,
cf. Kuyper, p. 73. The fact that Calvin saw no practical significance in the com-
munism of the Primitive State is connected with his whole change of the point
of view of the ethic of love into an ethic of the glorification of God, and it is
of great significance for his rationalism of the formation of the State and of
Society, although it is little noted.
361 (p. 614.) The meaning of the First Table, Inst., II, 8 , 16: “Pura sit ergo
conscientia vel ab occulissimis apostasiae cogitationibus, si religionem nostram
Deo approbare libet. Siquidem integram et incorruptam divinitatis suae
gloriam non externa modo confessione requirit, sed in oculis suis, qui abditis-
simas cordium latebras intuentur.” The meaning of “spirituality**, II, 8, 6:
“Paulus affirmans legem esse spiritualem significat non modo animae, mentis,
voluntatis obsequium exigere, sed requirere angelicam puritatem, quae
omnibus carnis sordibus abstersa nihil quam spiritum sapiat.’* This is a quite
different meaning for “spirituality** than that in vogue among the Lutherans,
for whom the antithesis is spirit and law, love and rights (see above, pp. 494,
497 > 5 * 6 )-
853 (p. 615.) Examples of this State Rationalism, which proceeds not from
popular sovereignty but from the idea of the purpose of the State, and therefore
finally involves the ethical, philosophical, Christian, and also the legal
obligation of the Government to the solus publico and, further, the advocacy of
the Church will be found in Beyerhaus, pp. 69, 95-97 , IS3-1S9. The essence of
authority is to measure all by this standard — “ad Dei cultum tuendum et
PROTESTANTISM
899
promovendum ct populi totius commodum et utilitatem procurandam (7*5)” ;
all this is best guaranteed by a written constitution ( 123 ). This is something
quite different from Luther’s conception of authority (see above, ppQ&i~532)*
864 (p. 616.) There are examples of this subject in the very condensed
twentieth chapter of Book IV; see especially the famous passage ( paragraph 31)
in which Calvin declares that a moderately aristocratic republic is the State
form which approximates most closely to the ideal of Natural Law. Hence
Providence has endowed most States with such organs in the course of the
historical process: “quales olim erant, qui Lacedaemoniis erant oppositi
regibus Ephori aut Romanis consulibus Tribuni plebis aut Athenicnsium
senatui demarchi, et qua etiam forte potestate, ut nunc res habent, funguntur
in singulis regnis tres ordines, cum primarios conventus peragunt” ( e.g . the
German estates of the Empire and the States General in France). Of these
magistrats infbrieurs it is said : “illis ferocienti regium licentiae pro officio inter-
cedere adeo non veto, ut, si regibus impotenter grassantibus et humili plebeculae
insultantibus conniveant, eorum dissimulationem nefaria pcrfidia non carere
affirmcm, quia populi libertatem, cujus se Dei ordinatione tutores positos
norunt, fraudulenter produnt.” In this we see the compromise between Luther’s
authoritarian way of thinking, which Calvin fully shares, with his rational
ideal of Society which secures the claims of the individual. For the constant
criticism of State and of Society in its aim and purpose which this produced,
see Choisy, pp. 493 ff. ; Beyerhaus , pp. 108-130. — Kuyper also quotes some charac-
teristic words of Calvin: “Haec maxime optabilis est libertas, non cogi ad
parendum quibuslibet, qui per vim impositi fuerunt capitibus nostris, sed
electiionem permitti, ut nemo dominetur, nisi qui probatus fuerit” ; and p. 77 :
“Ye people to whom God has given liberty to elect your own rulers, see to it
that ye do not use this favour unwisely by electing worthless persons and
enemies of God to the highest posts of honour.” That is a rational Natural Law
which must lead finally to laying on the Government the obligation of observing
the laws in as nearly an ideal way as possible, as, indeed, Calvin co-operated
in this sense in the endeavour to observe the political laws of Geneva. It is a
germ of constitutionalism, as Kuyper , p. 89 , rightly points out and Beyerhaus
confirms.
366 (p. 617.) The examples for this are given in great detail in both Choisy’s
books. It also permeates the whole tradition of the Calvinistic ethic in its varied
and independent development. Even in the eighteenth century Lampe teaches
in his ethic : “Finis, in quern ipse Deus mundum conservat, est ecclesiae con-
servatio et electorum salus. Si salus singulorum est rei publicae finis, turn liquet,
quod quo perfectior est salus, ad quam leges societatis civilis tendunt, eo
perfectior sit ipsa rei publicae forma. Salus temporalis ct acterna ita sibi
invicem sunt innexae, ut ilia absque hac inanis umbra sit.” Luthardt:
Geschichte der Ethik , II, 219. Here also we must observe the spirit of utilitarian
individualism.
856 (p. 617.) The conception of a fundamental theory of this kind was
expressly formulated by Calvin himself, since in his discussion of the Fifth
Commandment he describes the sociological relation of the family with its
authorities and the spiritualizing of authority as the fundamental common
ratio which lies at the basis of all other social relationships : “Quoniam hoc
de subjectione praeceptum cum humani ingenii pravitate valde pugnat
(quod, ut est celsitudinis appetentia turgidum, aegre se subjici sustinet) ea,
quae natura maxime amabilis atque minime invidiosa superioritas, in exemplar
proposita est, quia facilius animos nostros emollire et inflectere ad submissionis
900 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
consuetudinem poterat. Ad omnem enim legithnam subjectionem ab ea, quae
facillima est toleratu, nos paullatim, assuefacit Dominus : quando est omnium
cadem ratio. Siquidem quibus attribuit eminentiam, quatenus ad earn tuendam
necesse est, suum cum illis nomen communicat. In unum ipsum ita conveniunt
Patris, Dei ac Domini tituli, ut, quoties unum aliquem ex iis audimus,
majestatis illius sensu animum nostrum feriri oportcat. . . . Quapropter
ambiguum esse non debet, quia hie universalem regulam statuat Dominus:
nempe prout quemque novimus esse nobis ejus ordinatione praefectum, ut
ipsum reverentia, oboedientia, gratitudine et quibus possumus officiis prose-
quamur. Nec interest, disquirere an indigni sint, quibus honor iste deferatur ;
nam qualescunque sint tandem, non sine Dei Providentia hunc locum assequuti
sunt” (Inst., II, VIII, 33). This looks as though it were the same as the patri-
archalism of Lutheranism developed from the ideal of the family. Only the
continuation shows that this is meant somewhat differently: “Sed istud etiam
obiter annotandum, quod illis obedire nonnisi in Domino jubemur : neque id
obscurum est ex jacto prius fundamento : praesident enim eo loco, in quern
erexit eos Dominus. . . . Quae ergo submissio illis exbibetur, ad suscipiendum
summum ilium Patrem grad us esse debet. Quare si in legis transgressionem
nos instigant, merito turn non parentis loco nobis habendi runt, sed extranei,
qui nos a veri patris obedientia subducere conantur. Sic de principibus,
dominis et universo superiorum genere habendum. Indignum enim et absonum
est, ut ad deprimendam Dei celsitudinem eorum eminentia polleat, quae, ut
ab ilia pendet, ita in illam diducere nos debet” (Inst., II, VIII, 38). An all-
round description of the nature of Society and of the relation of the individual
members to each other, see Inst., II, VIII, 46 : ‘‘Honest gain without desire for
riches; the support of all in the enjoyment of their rightful possessions and,
as far as possible, avoidance of strife with deceitful and faithless men, even at
the cost of one’s own loss; in cases of need the utmost readiness to help;
correctness and strictness in keeping all legal obligations ; obedience to legal
authority ; the obligation of all authorities to consider the welfare of those who
are under their protection with a constant consciousness of their responsibility
in the sight of God ; duties of the clergy in dogmatic and ethical instruction
and good example ; trust and obedience of the people to the clergy ; mild but
authoritative education of children, respect of youth for age; friendly and
understanding counsel to youth by age; willing and cheerful obedience of
servants for the sake of God; brotherly and considerate attitude of masters
towards their servants ; each individual first occupied with the endeavour to
fulfil his own duties ; finally, constant looking up to and sense of responsibility
of all towards the Divine law-giver.”
857 (p. 618.) This is the very important contribution of Ritschl to the
understanding of Calvinism. From this point of view he has absolutely corrected
the mystical individualism of Lutheranism and has tried to support Lutheran-
ism by means of the Calvinistic idea of the Church ; this also is an example of
the increasing importance of Calvinism at the present day ; cf. Rechtfertigung und
Vtrsohnung*, I, pp. 203-216 : “In this Calvin has saved a principle which Luther
in his original right feeling of the reciprocity of the idea of justification with
life in the congregation of the faithful placed in contrast to the erroneous
structure of the Roman Catholic Sacrament of Penance and its ecclesiastical
system(?)” (p. 216). It would, however, be more true to refer this contrast to
a certain mystical tendency of Luther which led him to treat the individual
in isolation ; in his early years this was one of Luther’s predominating ideas ;
as time went on, however, it receded into the background and the idea of the
PROTESTANTISM
901
Church took its place, but the effects of the earlier ideas are still operative in
Lutheranism as a whole.
360 (p. 620.) The inequality continues in the other life, as Calvin argues
from 1 Cor. xv. 41-42 (Brief e, II, 66). The higher position a man occupies
the more is he bound to endure martyrdom (II, p. 277). Cf. also Troeltsch :
P.raedestination , Ch. W., 1907. — There are also characteristic passages in Beyer -
haus , 99 : “We ought to know ‘que d’autant plus qu’un homme sera eslev6 il
est oblig6 aussi et k Dieu et k ceux sur lesquels il preside comme il n’y a nulle
preeminence sans charge, voir sans servitude*. The sphere of these moral
duties in which this ‘servitude honorable* ought to exercise itself is placed in
the comprehensive conception of the common weal which corresponds to the
eudaemonistic State theories of the Ancient World.’* P. 139: “This dominion
of individual viri maximi, which he regards as the original form, is described
in the following words : ‘mediocris status hominum, ut si qui aliis praessent,
non tamen dominarentur, nec sibi regium imperium sumerent, sed dignitate
aliqua contenti civilem in modum regerent alios et plus autoritatis haberent
quam potentiae* ** ( CR.,51 , 159). Example, Noah. This situation which Calvin
describes as vetustissimus mundi status on that account enjoys God’s special
favour because it Corresponds to the demands of a moderata administratio , that is,
on the side of the Government it preserves the aequalitas cum minoribus , on the
side of the subjects a willing spirit (sponte magis eos reverabantur quam imperio
coacti). This aristocratic form of government “was first broken through by
the ambition of Nimrod : he is the archetype of the tyrant, his name hence-
forward is a byword.” — This blend of aristocracy and masterfulness with the
free initiative of each responsible individual is a permanent characteristic of
the peoples which have been educated or influenced by Calvinism ; they are
remote from the equalitarian Latin democracy of Rousseau’s school ; indeed,
in this respect Rousseau was in no wise a disciple of Calvin, although people
often tried to make him one. This is the reason why in England the Socialism
of self-help co-operative societies and trade unions provided the first outlet for
these ideas, and therefore genuine social democracy could only make headway
with difficulty. In America also the slow progress of Socialism must also be due
to this education in self-help. It is, however, true that even there this difference
is being increasingly nullified by the effects of industrial capitalism of the
present day, which are everywhere the same. — Kuyper considers this idea from
all sides, and he sees in Calvinism the great modern principle of civilization.
For the contrast between the American and the French Revolution, see this
expression of Hamilton in Kuyper , p. 80: “The principles of the American and
the French Revolution resemble each other about as much as the quiet Puritan
house-mother resembles the adulterous wife in a scandalous French novel.”
In the same book (p. 78) the contrast between the French and the English
Revolution is thus expressed by Burke : “Our Revolution and that of France
are just the reverse of each other in almost every particular and in the whole
spirit of the transaction.” — Gladstone also says to Ruskin : “I am a firm believer
in the aristocratic principle, the rule of the best. I am out and out inegalitarian.
. . . How are you to get the rule of the best? Freedom is the answer” ( Morley ,
Gladstone's Life , II, 582). For Gladstone the highest virtues are self-command,
self-control, respect for order, patience under suffering, confidence in the law,
regard for superiors (II, 124). — Carlyle also in support of his ideal appeals to
Puritanism and Calvinism ; see Baumgarten : Carlyle und Goethe , 1906: “The eternal
right of the dignity of man, the aristocracy of the heroes and obedience, that is,
submission to the better”, this is his sociological ideal. The idea of equality is
90a THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
at home in the radical section of the Baptist movement, in the Stoic Natural
Law, and in the modern Natural Law, but not in Calvinism. From those
sources it certainly has penetrated into Calvinistic peoples, but it has never
radically triumphed. In the book which I am about to mention by Hagermann:
Erkldrungen der Menschen - und Biirgerrechte, on p. 77 it is said of Milton : “We read
in Milton that all men are by nature born free. However, this freedom is a
Protestant freedom; he calls it ‘a due liberty and proportioned equality, both
human and Christian’, as we have seen in the American constitution to some
extent men have not advanced beyond this demand for equality ...” In the
same book ( p . 45), see remarks about the origin of American equality from the
literature of the Enlightenment. Especially instructive in this respect is Held:
Zwei Bucher zur soziden Geschichte Englands y 1881. Here the continuance of the
Puritan conservative features within Liberalism is explicitly described, especially
in Burke. Likewise everywhere here the connection is shown between the
radical democratic theories and, in particular, the French equalitarian proposi-
tions ( pp . 340-342 , 288-233 ) : “The spirit of Cromwell’s God-fearing regiments
was still alive and active in the social struggles of the nineteenth century, and
it was due to this fact that in spite of all passion and confusion the working-
classes remained true to the State and its laws.” “Puritan vie\tfs which restrained
the spirit of democracy by a strong Christian sense of duty lived on effectively
among the Dissenters ; Hampden remained a more popular hero than Robe-
spierre.” — The history of the problem of equality would be one of the most
important contributions which could be made to the understanding of the
development of European Society. It is, however, still entirely unwritten ; there
are some suggestions in Lorenz von Stein: Soz . und Komrn.,pp. 3-128.
361 (p. 621.) Cf. the presentation of the fundamental theory in Choisy:
Udtat chritien , pp. 483 ff. : “Calvinism is animated by a great spirit of equality,
of justice, and of social solidarity. The person and the activity of man being . . .
immediately dependent on God and His Word, it follows that all men are
equally obliged to obey God and are equal before His law. No one is capable of
doing good apart from a gift of God, a communication of His Spirit. Since
things are so, no man of himself has the right to dominate over others. Authority
belongs to God alone, and there is no respect of persons before God. This
fundamental equality before God and His Law results in the authority of
parents over their children, of magistrates over their subjects, and even of
men of science and of talent over those who do not possess these gifts ; this
authority does not belong actually to those who exercise it : it belongs to God,
who exercises it through them. In consequence it will be suspended as soon as
they abuse it or use it contrary to the Will and the Counsel of God. Also at
Geneva the Ordinance takes in hand the protection of the rights of children
against unjust or negligent parents ; and the ministers defend the cause of the
people and its rights over against the magistrate, and the Compagnie and the
Consistoire constitute themselves the champions of justice, of the equality of all
before the law ; they exact the punishment of highly placed culprits, of persons
of quality, just as they do that of obscure and uninfluential culprits. However,
if the Calvinist spirit is a spirit of justice and equality, that does not mean a
spirit which abolishes all distinctions; it recognizes natural differences,
Providential inequalities, special gifts, exceptional vocations, extraordinary
talents. These inequalities, however, do not constitute from the Calvinistic point
of view rights for those who enjoy them, but they constitute obligations of
service. Calvinism has given to men of every kind the sense of their solidarity
in their moral obligations and in their responsibility towards God.” Further,
PROTESTANTISM
903
for the sense of individualism within this solidarity, see Choisy : La Thiocratie ,
p. 279 : “Also genuine Calvinists possessed to a high degree the sense of responsi-
bility, the spirit of initiative, the need for veracity, and the moral energy of the
will and full self-command.’ * Descriptions of the fundamental theory, of the
“relation between individuals”, also in Kvyper> pp. 19-24. Here, however,
there is an exaggerated emphasis upon the democratic results : “Their endeavour
was to look first at God and then at their neighbour; this was their mood,
their spiritual habit, which was created by Calvinism, and only from this
devout reverence for God in which all were in the Presence of God did there
develop a consecrated democratic sentiment. This means that all, whether
man or woman, rich or poor, strong or weak, talented or ignorant, have no
personal claims at all, all are God’s creatures and lost sinners; this means,
therefore, that both as an individual and as a people, both before God and in
all human relationships, we are all on the same level, and no other difference
between human beings ought to exist excepting in so far as God has given to
one a higher position than another or more gifts than another, in order that
he may give more service to others and that in others he may render more
service to his God. For this reason Calvinism condemns not only every kind
of slavery and caste system, but just as decidedly all concealed slavery of
women and of the poor ; it opposes all hierarchy among men and tolerates no
other aristocracy than that which, whether in an individual or a race, obviously
possesses a greater amount of moral or intellectual capacity through the grace
of God, and thus shows that he does not wish to use this over-plus for himself
in order to increase his own reputation, but that he wishes to use it for God
in His world.”
862 (p. 623.) Choisy , in particular, brings out the character of a “Christian
Socialism”, the united care for external well-being, and the moral correctness
of each individual exercised by the authority of Church and State, the common
responsibility of the community for each member, the social reform and
philanthropy which was carried out down to the smallest detail, and he
illustrates this with numerous examples from the records. This Socialism is
thoroughly anti-Communist, but everywhere it makes the community respon-
sible for the individual members, and in certain instances it requires the greatest
sacrifices of public and private means. In all this the clergy are the driving force ;
their methods are partly the penalties of the municipal court of justice and
partly the hailing of offenders before the magistrate who dealt with minor
offences. They demand the regulation of the price of corn, see Choisy : L'itat
chrttien , pp. 117 , 121, 244 ; laws against luxury and sumptuary regulations for
the sake of frugality as well as of the maintenance of class barriers and of
decency (pp. 118 , 148 , 231 ) ; rate of interest corresponding to the business
situation (pp. 119 , 190 ) ; paying back of debts in the same value in which they
were contracted (p. 120 ) ; the “Blue Monday” forbidden (p. 133 ) ; statistical
inquiries according to districts about income, need of support, family circum-
stances, etc. (pp. 166 and 257 ) ; supervision of inn-keepers and cheap prices for
wine ( p . 167 ) ; impartiality and correctness in the administration of justice
( p . 196) ; introduction of manufactures in order to give employment to the
population, and a careful selection of those who are to be sent away from
the overcrowded town (p. 246) ; strict morality and honesty of the troops in the
occupied territories (p. 290) ; similar points of interest in pp. 302 and 342.
All these matters came before the Council either in the form of a motion or a
complaint. In other matters the court of discipline acted independently: it
punished commercial deceit, dishonest coal-dealers, a velvet manufacturer
904 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
because one of his lengths was short by one inch, a tailor who gave preferential
treatment to foreign customers, a surgeon who asked too high fees ; it served
as a peace-maker and a court of arbitration; it pointed out offences which
had been overlooked by the civil authorities, protected the weak, and punished
those who ill-treated children, etc. ( pp . 443 ff.). “The Consistory intervenes in
order to restore peace and unity in family life and to call individuals to do
their duty ; it takes in hand . . . reforms in favour of the helpless and the
weak ; it censures the lazy and the idle as well as fathers and creditors who
were too harsh ; it shows no mercy to usurers, monopolists, or tradesmen who
defraud their customers. It strives against the coarse customs of the t time, the
brutality of the men and the careless negligence in the treatment of sick people”
{La Theocratic , p. 244). It is, otherwise, clear that in this Church social policy
the methods and ideas of the old policy of the guilds and the municipality are
transferred to the whole commonwealth. Doumergue has proved many of these
things in detail. The acceptance of these principles by the Church, which acted
in common with the State and the systematic unified extension over the whole
of Society, marks the difference between this policy and that of the mediaeval
Church and of Lutheranism, which left most of these matters to the State and
the guilds and otherwise undertook essentially caritative Social policy. — In
addition there were the taxes and loans in favour of the poor, both the poor of
the district and the refugees, which were constantly increased until they
reached the utmost limit ; without considerable and constant financial assistance
from outside the whole system would have been impossible to maintain in
Geneva, whose very existence was always threatened. Vitat chritien , pp. 428 ff.
In this financial solidarity the early Christian love communism was revived. —
For the Christian social character as the main factor in Calvinism, see also
Rieker , p. 68 , and Gobel , //, 123 . — For the development of this guild Christian
Socialism into modern Christian Socialism, see Held and von Schulze-Gavernitz :
Zum sozialen Frieden.
398 (p. 628.) The congregational character of the Calvinistic Church is
undeniable. For the congregation has a share in everything, even although it
may be only through carefully selected lay representatives, as in the court of
discipline or through the power to vote as in the election of pastors; cf. the
sentence from CR ., AX, 9, quoted by Holly p. 34: “les pseudod-evesques ont
ravy a ^assemble des fideles et tire a eux la cognaissance et puissance d’excom-
munier.” But the official positions themselves are not the expression of the
free choice of the congregation, but they are a Divine appointment, hence also
they are not bound to come into existence through the activity of the con-
gregation ; see Rieker: Grundsatze reformierter Kirchenverfassung , pp. 32, 1 26 ff., and
i2gff. Thus even in Geneva the Church constitution was very aristocratic,
the election of pastors was carried out by the pastors, the community was only
asked to consent. The elders on the Board of Discipline were chosen partly by
the Council and partly were nominated by the pastors. Proposals which went
further, suggesting, for instance, that the congregations should carry out the
elections themselves or even that the congregations should possess the right of
discipline, were rejected and, indeed, by the pastors themselves; see Choisy:
Vitat chritienyp. 79, likewise in the sphere of the constitution of the State {p. 143).
Cf. the description which Calvin gave himself in the letter to Olevian, who was
at Heidelberg, as a model for the organization in the Palatinate {Briefcy //,
The French Church constitution of the same character, see March ’
Coligny, I, i,p. 331 ; about Geneva, pp. 237 ff. The Synods also were not repre-
sentative bodies, but governing bodies formed according to the Divine appoint-
PROTESTANTISM
905
ment (Richer , 158). Everywhere, however, the tacit consent of the community
is always presupposed, and the far-reaching right of protest was at least a
democratic element.
870 (p. 628.) This is the important section in Institutio IV, 20, 8, Equidem -
cogitatio; cf. the synoptic impression of the edition CR,, XXIX, p. 1105. It is in
opposition to the earlier passage (VIII, 20, 7), where the monarchy which
condemns all men to servitude appears to be authenticated by the Scriptures
for the restraint of human evil. On that point in Doumergue : Les origines his -
toriques de la declaration des droits de Vhomme , 1905, pp. ioff., see the quoted passage
from Calvin’s lectures which plainly reflect the experiences of Geneva: on
Micah v.*5 : “The prophet here magnifies the singular kindness of God, that is
to say, that the people will be restored to their liberty. And, in fact, it is a most
desirable situation when the pastors (that means here the magistrates in
general) are elected and created by the common voice of the people. For where
empire and sovereignty is usurped by violence there is a tyranny which is too
barbarous. There also, where the kings rule by right of succession and of
inheritance, it does not seem very favourable to liberty” (CR., XLHI, 374 ). —
On Deut. xvi. 1 1 : “When we see these examples (that is, of bad kings) we
know that it is tn inestimable gift if God permits a people to have liberty to
elect their leaders and magistrates . . . seeing then that it is an excellent gift,
let us see that we conserve it and that we use it with a good conscience” (CR.,
XXVII, p. 41 /). This, then, became the official manner in which the Genevans
spoke of their Republic as of a special gift of God which made it possible to
Christianize the State, as Choisy shows in many places. Also in Beyerhaus there
are similar passages (pp. 116-129).
871 (p. 629.) Every biography of Calvin shows this fact about him, for example
Kampschulte , II, 355-357. The negotiations with the magistrate about the cri au
peuple and its effectiveness in Choisy: L'ttat chritien. P. 55: Colladin preaches
against usury and the Council treats that as mutiny. P. 154: Beza preaches on
behalf of the ministers against the prices of corn, etc. P. 190: sermon against
usury and the responsibility of the ministers : “They are bound to say freely
when the magistrate does not do what he ought. Faults are being committed.
Those who hear them mentioned inquire into the matter, and they reply
sometimes in general, sometimes in particular. These matters are sometimes
overwhelmingly manifest, and yet people do not want to see them. If we should
be silent, what would the people say? That they are dumb dogs. . . . Do people
think that they want to increase their power by ruining the magistrates, or
that they are trying to foment sedition as if they did not know that they them-
selves would be the first to suffer? But they are afraid that instead of arousing
others they will lose themselves. . .” Pp. 251 ff. : Six members of the Council
(under Beza’s influence) explained to the magistrate, with an appeal to religious
duty, the necessity of declaring war on Savoy, and they summoned the Govern-
ment “to put their hand to the matter immediately and without delay if we
do not wish to make shipwreck of the precious liberty which it has pleased
God to give and to conserve to us until now . . . and what would be still more
to be deplored, expose the holy Name of God, our Sovereign Father and
benefactor, to blasphemy and dishonour for which we would be gravely
responsible before His judgment seat”. The people are already murmuring
against the Council. “Good magistrates must respect the voice of the people
and the lamentations of men of good-will, especially in free states where
without the people they are nothing.” The right to undertake this war is
“ratified by the desire and the consent of the whole of this faithful people,
go6 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
which is instructed in the fear of God. ,, The Council answers that it realizes
the weight of this argument and hands it over to Beza to be considered.
P. 298: the ministers decide against a resolution of the Council of the Two
Hundred in appeal matters. To that is added a long struggle between the
ministers and the Council, which regards this as rebellion. P. 347: the ministers
protest against irregularities in an election and support this protest in sermons.
When the Council protested on its part, the Compagnie testified to their
‘‘displeasure that these gentlemen do not unite themselves with the people”.
They declare “that being informed by the people of certain faults which are in
the aristocracy, they are constrained to remonstrate with the magistrate”.
Further examples, pp. 996, 375, 335, 396 , 399 , 610 . P. 413: the permanent
significance of this cri au peuple in Geneva. P. 467: a striking comparison
of the ministers with the present-day influence of the Press. P. 469: a good
summary: “They were admirably well informed about the material, com-
mercial, and moral circumstances of the population; this was due to the
exercise of their functions as guardians of public morality. The part they
played in supervising the doctrines and the customs of the citizens brought
them into close touch with the details of the daily life of the Genevese. This
role of popular defenders and tribunes, or, rather, of prophets of the law of
God, contributed greatly to make them loved by the poorer classes ; indeed, it
made them persons who were admirably situated to serve as impartial mediators
between the different social classes.” — Choisy also rightly emphasizes the con-
stitutional character of the whole commonwealth. P. 498: “The political edicts
and the ecclesiastical ordinances enacted under the influence and with the
participation of Calvin are an authority superior to the magistrate and limit
his absolutist designs ; it is the constitutional law which he is not allowed to
abrogate, and which he may not touch without the consent of the people
united in general council. . . . The power of the magistrate is limited to a right
of control and of conservation.” In case of conflict his only way of getting
assistance is to call on the professional opinion of foreign churches. “Like the
magistrate, the faithful ought to watch to see that all that is done in the Church
is conformable to the ordinances of the Word of God ; they may oppose the
election of a minister whom they judge to be unworthy of his charge, and they
can ask the competent authority to depose a minister who does net fcilfil the
duties of his office faithfully” — this alone is a decidedly democratic main idea,
but characteristically the people is still only thought of in the person of its
representatives who have been appointed by God. These representatives are
in the highest sense the ministers, who therefore are particularly fond of
comparing themselves with the Prophets of the Old Testament and their
mission to the people {pp. 72 and 123). The people act directly only through
the elections, but those who arc elected are only nominated after a very careful
process of selection.
87a (p- 630.) This is the famous treatise Dejure magistratuum , which previously
figured anonymously among the writings of the so-called monarchomachi ,
even in Gierke: Althusius a , p . 4 , which, however, Cartier (. Bulletin de la Soc.
d'histoire et d'archiologie de Geneve, Bd. II, 1898-1904 , pp. 187-206) has proved
from the records of the Council to have been written by Beza. I have before me
an edition of 1580 (from Basle) as a supplement to MachiavellVs Principe, together
with the Vindiciae contra tyrannos . The Council refused to give their imprimatur
to this work when they realized its content, for fear of the French Ambassador,
and thus to a great extent the work appeared anonymously. Cartier indicates
its content very aptly in the following sentences, P. 188: “The only will is that
PROTESTANTISM
907
of the only God, which is the perpetual and immutable rule of all justice (it is
‘jus illud naturae, a quo uno pendet totius humanae societatis conservatio’,
266 \ conceived in its application to both Tables, soy ). — The peoples whom it
has pleased to allow themselves to be governed either by a prince or by some
chosen lords are more ancient than the magistrates, and in consequence the
people is not created for the magistrate, but, on the contrary, the magistrate for
the peoples. — All resistance of a subject to his superior is neither illicit nor
seditious. — Rightful resistance by force of arms is not at all contrary to the
patience and the prayers of Christians. — All ought to oppose those who wish
to usurp power over their fellow-citizens or over others who are not subject
to them.-*-The estates are above kings. — The estates or others who have been
instituted to serve as a curb to sovereign rulers can and ought to restrain them
in all the ways they can when they have become tyrants. — The public good
and the rights of the nation are superior to those of the individual, even to
those of the sovereign. — The unjust usurper of power can become a legitimate
and inviolable magistrate provided that he gives his free and true consent to
the terms by which legitimate magistrates are created. — If one is persecuted
for religion it is right to make armed resistance with a good conscience. ,, — All
this sounds ver^ modern and democratic, but we must not overlook the fact
that the genuine Calvinistic restrictions in favour of historic right and its
conception have been established indirectly by the Providence of God, and
are, therefore, regarded as having been instituted by God Himself. I have
noted them above in the text ; they appear again and again in the whole book,
with emphasis on the Christian spirit of obedience. Above all, this is important
for the conception of the rise of the State and the social contract. The rise of
the State is always in the Aristotelian manner conceived as organic ; the social
contract of a mutual obligation between subjects and rulers which binds the
rulers to the observance of Natural and Divine Law is contained in this only
silently and as a matter of course. Historic law is to be recognized everywhere ;
it is, however, only Divine when its content agrees with Natural and Divine
Law, otherwise every robber would be obeying a Divine Law ( p . 28y). The
mutual obligation is taken for granted with the existence of definite positive
laws ; if they are lacking it is based upon the tacitly assumed Law of Nature
( pp . syf^and 2y$). There is no idea of a rational shaping of the State through
a social contract ; all that is aimed at is to assert that in the historic law the
Divine and Natural germ does exist if this should be denied. And it is true
only in legitimate ways through the subordinate authorities ; private individuals
can only act as those who have been commissioned by them, which, however,
in the end means that the private individuals also are indirectly included ( p . 2yg ) .
When the tyrant has been corrected, then historic law must be restored, whether
by himself or through someone else acting in his place; p. 293: “Si quidem
cum non nisi certis conditionibus administratio illi (that is, the tyrant) sit
commissa: minime censendum est, novas pactiones cum ipso iniri, quoties
interpellatur ut vel priores conditiones ratas habeat easque deinceps observet,
vel alteri locum cedat, qui de illorum observatione magis sit futurus sollicitur.
. . . Ordines vero vel status regionis (that is, the subordinate authorities who
are justified in resistance), quibus haec autoritas a legibus est collata, eatenus
sese tyranno opponere atque adeo ipsi justas et promeritas poenas irrogare et
possunt et debent, donee res in pristinum statum restitutae sint. Quodsi
praestiterint, tantum abest, ut seditiosi aut perduelles habendi sint, ut contra
officio suo et juramento probe defuncti turn demum censeri debeant” ( p . 266 ). —
The fact that Christ and the apostles did not resist the authority of the State,
908 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
their whole emphasis on suffering, is explained by the fact that they were
private individuals, and that there were no subordinate authorities in existence
who could protect the law, and thus until the present day they are the norm
for merely private individuals: “Dominus noster Jesus Christus, prophetae
item ac apostoli, cum privati erant homines, sese intra metas suae vocationis
continuerunt ,, ( p . 509) ! This means a most decided retention of historic law,
and it is easy to understand that the Genevan Council approved of the content
of the work. Even Luther, though only under the influence of the decision of
the jurists of 1530, himself approached such views to the extent of accepting
the idea of the right to execute a tyrant and the idea of the mutua obligatio
between people and rulers, even Melancthon had already made the distinction
between private individuals and magistratus inferiores ; likewise Osiander ( ?) ;
also the Erasmian and the Scholastic doctrine of the State is here in the
background ; see Cardauns: Wider standsrecht, pp. 8-15, 31 ff. — Beza has clearly
expressed the positive reasons for the justification of his theory. They are:
(1) the Christian aim of the State and its aim according to Reason (p. 216) ;
(2) the consequence of the lower court of justice (p. 217 ). — That theories of
this kind could proceed drectly from Calvin’s instruction is shown still more
strikingly by Knox’s theory, which was formulated in Geneva* and the treatise
by Goodman , the second pastor of the English Church, which teaches the right
of resistance almost without safeguards, How superior powers ought to be obeyed
of their subjects and wherein they may lawfully by God’s Word be disobeyed and resisted ,
Geneva , 1558. Calvin looked through this treatise, and the author reports that
Calvin thought it harsh and needing to be used with caution, but that its main
contention was right (Doumergue, pp. 28 ff.). The tractate by the English bishop,
Poynet: A short treatise of politic power , and of the true obedience which subjects own
to the King and other civile governors , 1356, written in Strassburg. Cardauns , 37-40,
proceeds directly from the standpoint of Calvin’s Institutes.
874 (p* 632.) On this point cf. Cartier , pp. 204-206; Figgis: From Gerson to
Grotius; Baudrillart: Bodin et son temps , 1833; Cardauns: Wider standsrecht, 1330;
Treumann: Monarchomachen, 1833 ( Staats - und volkerrechtlich Abhandlungen. hsg. v.
Jellinek, Nr. /); Elkan: Publizistik der Bartholomausnacht , and Mornay’s Vindicae,
1303 {Heidelberger Abhh. zur mittleren und neueren Geschichte, Nr. 3); Mialy: Les
publicistes de la r if or me, 1303 ( Thhe of the Paris FaculU de The'ol. Prot.); fq lJurieu,
see Doumergue, p. 22, and Luran: Les doctrines politiques de J ., 1304. In this respect
it is unfortunate that the theological ethic of Calvinism has not been yet
carefully examined, but in any case, from the time of Beza, its important
representatives agree with the publicists and the jurists on this point. Thus the
resemblance between the ideas of the Monarchomachi and the principles of
Rousseau ought not to be overestimated. They are concerned with deductions
drawn from the Scriptures, the Law of Nature, and theology ; they are not
concerned with the decided rationalism of an independent philosophy of the
State. Treumann , who calls attention to the lack of a clear distinction between
the social contract and the contract of sovereignty (p. 30, also Elkan, 133 ), as
well as in reference to the “theocratic” limitations, has also recognized this,
but he has not emphasized its importance sufficiently. The question is not one
of the “retention of the ideas of contract without attacking the theocratic basis
of the right of the ruler” (p. 36), but it is a question of the introduction of this
idea also as an ingredient into all historic law; not one of setting aside an
ideal of the State, which previously had been absolute, theocratic, and
monarchical (p. 77) — there was never an ideal of this kind in Calvinism — but of
the introduction of methods of control into the constitution which was itself
PROTESTANTISM
909
unaltered. The contract idea is, therefore, quite dissimilar from the conceptions
of Hobbes, Grotius, and Rousseau, and it remains true to the standpoint of
the historic and therefore Divine Law. — Thus their ideas lack also the neces-
sary presupposition of the later philosophy of the State, of the social contract,
and the contract of sovereignty, the original freedom and equality. It is true
that Elkan ( p . 30) says : “Ultimately the whole structure was based upon the
idea of freedom for humanity, which was absolutely taken for granted. No one
took the trouble to find an argument for this doctrine, scarcely anyone even
dreamed of doubting it.” Therewith he only proves the absence of this doctrine.
In reality, the Calvinistic and non-modern character of this whole school of
writers is«based upon the absence of this doctrine. To them the social contract
of equal and free men is superfluous because the Aristotelian organic doctrine
is applied to the rise of Society ; this, however, also implies inequality in rank,
the distinction between private individuals and officials, the sovereignty of the
objective law, not the subjective equal share in Reason. Further, the idea of
equality is excluded by the spirit produced by the doctrine of predestination.
The youthful work of La Boitie (who was certainly not a Calvinist): Discours
de la servitude volontaire , which began at the standpoint of the original freedom
and equality in tfie Stoic Humanistic sense, and declared that servitude arose
out of willing submission, was rejected by the Calvinists ( Baudrillart , 68-73),
Mdaly, 63 . — It should be noted that Cardauns derives the Calvinistic theory
from the branches of Lutheran propaganda which were influenced by Hesse
and Strassbuig in the days of the League of Schmalkalden, and of the Magde-
burg struggles, as, indeed, Beza's tractate in its first edition (1574) was intro-
duced as being “public deceux de Magdebourg Pan 1550” ( Cartier , 187). Also Ritter:
Anfdnge des niederland. Aufstandes {Hist. Z eitschr . 38, 1887, p. 423), quotes from
a letter of 1556, in which a tractate is mentioned which deals with the problem
of resistance and the justification of the magistratus inferiores , and he holds that
this tractate refers either to the Gutachten of the ministers and lawyers of
Wittenberg, or to the Vermahnung der Pfarrherrn von Magdeburg , 1343. Cf. also
Cardauns , p. 7/, Beza’s appeal to the people of Magdeburg. In point of fact,
all the ideas of the Calvinistic theory are also found, although in a confused
way, in the works of many German writers. Only the Calvinistic doctrines have
one mayi theoretical feature and principle derived from the fundamental
religious idea of Calvinism — the idea of the glory of God, and of the equality
of all in the presence of God, which clearly distinguishes them from those
Lutheran theories, and, indeed, these theories themselves were an illogical and
passing phenomenon, and at the best only a by-product of Lutheranism ; this
latter point is not sufficiently emphasized by Cardauns , see above, pp. 330
and 532 .
375 (p. 634.) Cf. Martin: De la Genhse des doctrines religieuses de John Knox , and
De la Genkse des doctrines politiques de J. K., in the Bulletin de la sociiti de Phistoire
du prot. frangais, 1306, 133-211, and 1307, pp. 133-221 . Cf. also Cardauns and
Elkan. Cf. also in the book by Bastide on Locke , to be mentioned shortly, the
section entitled Theories politiques en Angleterre au 16 et ij? me sikles , pp. 137-176.
The conservative legitimist Calvinistic character of the Presbyterian and
Independent movement is here rightly emphasized in contrast to that of the
“Levellers” and kindred groups. We shall see later on that the latter were nearer
to the spirit of the Anabaptists than to that of the Calvinists. The forces which
were at work in the so-called “Independency” were utterly different. — Pareus
in Heidelberg also taught that kings might be deposed, see Bastide , p . 144 ;
this idea was not peculiar to the English Revolution.
9io THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
876 (p* 635.) Cf. Gierke* s Althusius *, in which, with his admirable learning and
industry, Gierke examines the origin of all these elements of thought. Gierke
also rightly lays stress on the fact that the new theory stands out clearly from
the previous religious theory, especially the presupposition of universal freedom
and equality before the social contract ( pp . 29, yg, and ioy). Further valuable
details dealing with this subject will be found especially on pp. 28 and 30 ,
59 and 69, y6 , 2iy, and 143. The view that subordinate authorities are justified in
resistance under certain circumstances is discussed on pp. 34 and 55. Indeed, a
Lutheran, Peter Gartz , has described the doctrine of Althusius as a product of
“Presbyterian error” (p. y) ; it is, however, in reality a step beyond genuine
Calvinism, and stands between it and the classic-Rationalistic Law of Nature.
877 (p. 636.) The famous work of Grotius (which I have used in the transla-
tion in the Kirchmannschen Philos. Bibliothek , i86g) shows everywhere its purely
humanist, philosophical, juridical character and its fundamental connection
with Stoicism ; the whole statement of the problem of war and of international
law starts from the cosmopolitan Stoic idea of humanity ; from this standpoint
it is believed that confessional struggles and conflicts can be absolutely over-
come. Therefore, in his opinion, the Law of Nature, the a priori rational
foundation, is entirely independent of all theology and of, all faith in God
(/, p. 31). For the relation to the previous Protestant doctrine of the State the
declaration regarding the Old Testament is characteristic: “Many would like
to raise the Old Testament to the level of a Law of Nature, but they are wrong.
For much that it contains proceeds from the decree of God, which is certainly
not in conflict with true Nature” (/, 60). This means that the Law of Nature
is no longer identified with the political ethic of the Old Testament. With
reference to the New Testament he says : “I make use of the New Testament
because that which is permitted to Christians I can learn from it alone. Unlike
most other writers, however, I distinguish this content from the Law of Nature
itself; for I am convinced that in this holiest of all laws a higher holiness is
taught than the Law of Nature requires for itself alone. Yet I have always noted
whether in certain instances some things are rather suggested than com-
manded. Since it is wrong and punishable to depart from the commandments
(that is, also from that which is commanded by Natural Law), whereas it is the
sign of a noble temper, which will not go unrewarded, if one always strives
to follow the highest, that is, the commands of the Gospel, which exceed those
of Nature (p. 61). This means that the Protestant habit of identifying the
Natural Law and the Sermon on the Mount has been given up, and it also
means the final emancipation of the Natural Law from the commands of the
Sermon on the Mount, as is shown in the long argument which follows. Then
there comes the vigorous establishment of the contract upon the presupposition
of an original communism and an original freedom and equality (/, pp. yo 9 y4 ,
y6 f 80 , go ) ; further, the rejection of anti-monarchist theories in the interest of
a unified State authority which is far removed from religious conflict (/, 193).
In accordance with this Grotius opposes the doctrine of predestination, and
from the dogmatic point of view he takes the side of the Arminians and the
Socinians. — The Natural Law of the period after Grotius departed still further
from the Calvinistic basis. Of Rousseau, above all, Gierke says very pertinently
that the idea of the contract of sovereignty is swallowed up in the social con-
tract ( Alth ., 91 ff .) ; in so doing, however, he destroyed every historic right,
and set up the ideal of small federated republics, in which the original freedom
and equality should be preserved by basing all legislation upon the general
will ; this may correspond to the Swiss republics, but it has nothing to do with
PROTESTANTISM
9 1 1
the spirit of Calvinism; indeed, it is in complete opposition to it. — French
Protestant apologists naturally approve of Rousseau’s estimate of Calvinism ;
cf. the work by Mialy and also Doumcrgue (who is much more restrained)
(pp. 53,55, and 63), Nevertheless, it is wrong. To describe Grotius and Pufendorf
as “representatives of Calvinist politics” (p. 25) is simply false; the Genevan
lawyer, Burlamaqui (d. 1748), whom Doumergue quotes with special emphasis,
represents a purely individualistic rationalism of freedom and equality, which
is quite remote from Calvinistic thought. Also Jurieu (d. 1713) already shows
this foreign influence (pp. 22ff.).
881 (p. 641.) Cf. Kampschulte, I, 385-480 , especially 423 ff.; II, 342-387;
Wiskemamy National okonomische Ansichten zur Zeit der Reformation , pp. 80-87 ;
Elster: Calvin als Staatsmann, Gesetzgeber und Nationalokonom. Jahrbb . f. National -
okonomie und Statistik , XXXI (based on Kampschulte and Wiskemann) ; Rachfahl :
Calvinismus und Kapitalismus , Internationale Wochenschrift , igog (in which there are
references to Calvin based upon Kampschulte , Elster, and Lang); Max Weber:
Protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus, Archiv XX and XXI; Laveleye,
Protestantismus und Katholizismus in ihren Beziehungen zur Wohlfahrt der Volker,
deutsch , p. 127; Choisy: Vital chretien ; E. Knodt : Bedeutung Calvins und des Cal-
vinismus fiir die Protestantische Welt ( Vortrage der Giessener Konferenz), 19/0. —
Weber's treatise is^o-day of fundamental importance. First of all he has handled
the problem in its great setting of the history of civilization, and on its inward
side he has linked the religious and ethical element with the social and economic
element. For my own part I have adopted these views of his which I have
found confirmed largely through a study of American life, and of that of the
Lower Rhine, and have used them in my more general works on the nature of
Protestantism and its significance for civilization, naturally not wholly without
using my own judgment, but it is quite unnecessary to stress this point. —
Rachfahl has attacked Weber and myself in the article which has just been
mentioned ; I do not, however, consider that in these matters he is a competent
judge.
382 (p. 641.) Passages in Kampschulte, I, 430; see also Brief e, I, 433, the recog-
nition of the poverty which Jesus commanded contrasted with monastic
poverty. Numerous examples of a similar anti-mammon spirit among his
followers in Choisy, 176 ff., to a proposal of the tradespeople to found a bank
with the ifcte of interest of 10 per cent., they recognize the “belle apparence”
of the project, but they fear “abus, d£sordres et dissolutions”, point out the
dangers of banking business in Paris, Venice, and Lyons, and they also point
out the destruction of Jerusalem and of Rome through riches: “Si ce change
est introduit, on dira, qu’& Geneve cbacun est banquier et qu’il n’a que des
preteurs. Si d’aventure Messieurs jugent n^anmoins que ce charge sera com-
mode, ils prient de bien considerer s’il sera tolerable de prater k deux et demi
par foire. ... Ils pensaient que la cit6 serait plus forte en demeurant pauvre”.
P. 346: “The Venerable Compagnie announces that they will preach to the
people on Tordre, Pob&ssance et la modestie*.” P. 223: They demand “qu*on
demeure en toute modestie et mediocrity”. Calvin already was quite of this
mind (Elster, igi) : ^Et en g^ndral, que chacun ait k se vestir honestement et
simplement selon son cstat et qualite et que tous, tant petits que grands,
monstrent bon exemple de modestie chr6tienne les uns aux autres.” — The
Church in the Netherlands still has too high a rate of interest, pawnbrokers*
shops and deposit businesses are vigorously opposed as methods of exploiting
the poor; see Knappert: Geschiedenis der nederlandsche hervormde Kerk , ign,
pp. 178-182 .
912 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
,S4 (p. 643.) This reaction of Geneva is emphasized by Kampschulte , p. 423.
Before Calvin Geneva had already a State system of legislation on interest,
which he simply took over. The fact that Calvin threw himself into the com-
mercial atmosphere of the city, which is taken for granted, is illustrated over
and over again by his correspondence. Briefe, /, 33, mercantile speculations in
respect of Calvin’s exile ; 81 and 306, recommendation of believers as appren-
tices ; 2og, Calvin’s own difficulty of raising a loan for himself ; 283, difficulties
of placing a nephew of Viret in a shop or as a traveller or as a collector of
debts; 234, similar difficulties in raising securities for a colleague in the
ministry. Advice to two citizens of Lausanne about financial transactions;
//, p. iog 9 efforts on behalf of debtors in order to secure the credit of Geneva.
Further illustrations of Calvin’s interest in financial and business matters can
be found in his correspondence ; see the German edition of his Letters , especially
the following pages in //, 360 , 740, 333 , 442. The same point of view is reflected
in the extracts from reports quoted by Choisy , see especially pp . 31 and 332;
34, 36 , and 58; 47 , 57, 140 , 134 , and 388.
887 (p. 644.) The details of this subject belong to the economic presentation
of the subject ; they are, however, not at all simple to represent statistically.
To that we must add the fact that in the neighbourhood of Calvinism there
were also other groups — Anglican, sectarian, and Lutheran— which also were
to some extent influenced by Calvinism. The fact itself is well known and
generally recognized. In addition to the literature which has already been
mentioned I would call the attention of the reader to the good summary in
Arnold: Calvinreden , pp. 28-33 ; here, p. 31: “Calvinism has produced this
proverb, ‘Faith removes mountains and works at the same time with axe and
spade*. Lutheranism also gave dignity to labour, but since all this was referred
to work in one’s ‘calling’, the free initiative of the individual was less definitely
released. . . . Calvin alone among the Reformers emphasized the fact that that
which makes work productive is not merely the physical and the intellectual
effort, but above all moral force. . . . The objective value of that which is
achieved by labour, the economic result, consists, according to this view, not
in temporary gain, but solely and only in the fact that honest work has been
done. An idea capable of infinite expansion ! This capacity for development is
so easily overlooked because people look upon it as such a natural thing, as,
indeed, it is.” There then follows a sketch of the expansion and ii-fluence of
Calvinistic industrialism and capitalism. — A characteristic example from the
Netherlands is given by Weber from the work entitled Political Arithmetic , by
the famous political economist W. Petty: Antikritisches , p. 184 : “Dissenters of
this kind (he means the supporters of the struggle for freedom in Holland, who
were primarily Calvinists) are, for the most part, thinking, sober, and patient
men, and such as believe that labour and industry is their duty towards God.”
This is not contradicted, but rather supported by the following passages from
the same author, ibid.,p. 188: “These people (namely, the Puritan Dissenters),
believing the justice of God and seeing the most licentious persons to enjoy
most of the world and its best things, will never venture to be of the same
religion and profession with voluptuaries and men of extreme wealth and
power who they think have their portion in this world.” — The extension of
bourgeois capitalism, in particular territories and the modifications which
there obtain, is treated by Weber: Antikritisches , pp. 186-188 , 132 ; conclusion,
pp. 571 and 334 ff. Here we see how also within a setting, which in itself was
unfavourable to Capitalism — as in East Friesland, New England, and Hungary
— similar, or at least related, influences were also operative. This development
PROTESTANTISM 913
of Capitalism is not dependent merely upon a favourable environment. —
Gobel, //, jg, gives numerous examples of Calvinism in the Netherlands and on
the Lower Rhine: “Its members (of the Calvinistic community at Aachen)
consisted almost entirely of wealthy and noble merchants, while all the
Lutherans were only tolerated as assessors.” //, p. 47: “The letters of credence
of the delegates and elders to the synods had to be put in the form of mercantile
letters of credit in order to avoid all danger of treachery or suspicion.” //, p. 106:
“And (after a description of their ascetic strictness of life) since both in Julich
and Berg they were excluded from all public offices, it was all the more natural
that the whole trade of the Lower Rhine, and the whole of the industry of these
parts which was here so important, especially fell into their hands, and that
still to-day it is in their hands in particular. Hence the districts of Berg, Mark,
and Julich, which have developed a remarkable manufacturing activity and
an extended trade, have become some of the richest and most remarkable parts
of Germany, which at the same time have gained a name for great attachment
to the Church and for personal piety.” //, p. 205— the writer is here quoting from
Labadie: “The elders and deacons fulfil their duties to the members of the
Church and the poor in their own districts ; the judges love righteousness and
the tradespeople carry on their trade in the sight of heaven and the masters
labour for eternity.” For the economic significance of Labadism, see //, pp. 238
and 2gg; in this respect it is only a heightened form of Calvinism. — With
reference to the economic ethic of English Puritanism, Cunningham , the well-
known English economic historian, says in a small book entitled The Moral
Witness of the Church on the Investment of Money and the Use of Wealthy Cambridge ,
J 9°9> PP • 23 jf- : “As the defect of the present-day ethic of the Church (in
England) is a one-sided tendency towards Socialism, so on the contrary the
one-sided nature of Puritanism and its neglect of other factors was its peculiarity.
Its fight against idleness and love of pleasure, and its recommendation of
disciplined work, have made it absolutely capitalistic. Unemployment and
idleness were the characteristic evils of the seventeenth century in England and
Scotland ; the great need for introducing a godly, sober, and righteous life into
the community appeared to be that of getting the population to submit to the
discipline of work. There were no half-measures in the Scottish treatment of
vagrants, according to the Act of 1663. Capitalists who set up manufactories
were errif>owered to impress any vagrants and ‘employ them for their service
as they see fit* for eleven years, without wages, except meat and clothing.
Good subjects were recommended to take into their service poor and indigent
children, who were to do any task assigned to them till they had attained the
age of thirty, and to be ‘subject to their masters’ correction and chastisement
in all manner of punishment (life and torture excepted)’. The seventeenth-
century Puritans took a stern view of the discipline which was good for children,
so that they might be kept from forming habits of idleness and drifting into
evil of every kind. While there was a strong sense of the religious duty of
insisting on hard and regular work for the welfare, temporal and eternal, of the
people themselves, there was a complete indifference to the need of laying down
or enforcing any restrictions as to the employment of money. Capital was
much needed in England, and still more in Scotland, for developing the
resources of the country and for starting new enterprises; freedom for the
formation and investment of capital seemed to the thoughtful city men of the
seventeenth century, who were mostly in sympathy with Puritanism, the best
remedy for the existing social evils. They were eager to get rid of the restrictions
imposed by the Pope’s laws, which it was possible to bring up in ecclesiastical
VOL. n. 00
914 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
courts as well as to be free from the efforts of the King’s Council to bring
home to the employing and mercantile classes their duty to the community.
The agitation against the interference of the bishops in civil affairs and the
triumph of Puritanism swept away all traces of any restrictions or guidance in
the employment of money. In so far as a stricter ecclesiastical discipline was
aimed at or introduced, it had regard to recreation and to immorality of
other kinds, but was at no pains to interfere to check the action of the capitalist
or to protect the labourer. From the time when the rise of Puritanism paralysed
the action of the Church (that is, the State Church), and prevented her from
maintaining the influence she had habitually exerted, it has been plausible
to say that Christian teaching appeared to be brought to bear on the side of
the rich and against the poor. The Puritans were probably right as to the most
serious evils of the day, and the economic means of overcoming them ; they
may well have felt that religious duty impelled them to the line they took.”
This book is otherwise also characteristic ; it is an expression on the part of
the clergy of their views on a Christian ethic of economics, and on its side
it develops a modern adaptation of early Christian ideas to the modern
capitalistic form of life which is to be accepted as the natural course of affairs.
With reference to Bremen, which is overwhelmingly Calvinistic, a conversation
between a leading tradesman of Bremen and a tradesman of Vienna about the
difference in the way of living of the luxurious Viennese tradespeople and of
the austere and frugal tradespeople of Bremen, which I found in the Sonntags -
blatt of the Bremer Nachrichten , Nr. 30 and 31 of igio {“Von alter Bremer Art”):
“ ‘Do you know, Musje R. (the Viennese), why we don’t act like that? . . .
Because we are free citizens of the Empire.’ — ‘But still’, says the other, ‘you are
also important tradespeople!’ — ‘And just on that account’, the man from
Bremen continues, ‘we need a lot of money, and also we have to save. But in
order that you may understand me, I must explain to you what a large trades-
man in an free imperial city really means. He is a man whp always works more
in order to earn more, and who always earns more in order to work more,
because in this way he does not use up his money, but gives it away in order
to employ more hands and to be able to feed more hungry people. The
Viennese merchant can buy estates and use up a good deal of his property.
I don’t think the worse of him for it. If there is distress in the land his Emperor
puts his hand into his pocket. But here, if there is distress, the free StSte turns
to its free citizens for help. The rich citizen is ready and willing to help and
to give. Also the citizen who is in difficulties naturally flies for help to the
citizen who is in better circumstances. If one of the citizens has earned a great
deal he has many claims to satisfy, and he does this gladly both as a fellow-
citizen and as a Christian. And now I would like to give you the prescription
for the medicine with which I want to die ! (The previous remarks were the
prescription for life). It is in Matt. xxiv. 12, 13, “He who abides in righteous-
ness and love unto the end will be saved”.’ ” The man from Bremen says that
the reason for his way of life is the republican character of the city of Bremen,
but the religious turn of the conversation shows that what is here in question
is the Calvinistic ethic, as, indeed, the whole article shows that the author is
strictly religious. — In the passages which have here been quoted there emerges
at many points the connection between this development and the position of
the Calvinists as a minority and their exclusion from official life, as also is
emphasized by Weber: Antikritisches , p. 188 . In the light of other passages,
however, this is not decisive. — An important point remains in the capitalistic
development of Calvinism in the direction of the middle classes and the
PROTESTANTISM
9i5
bourgeoisie. To this is due in England the contrast between the 4 ‘squirearchy
and the bourgeois middle classes, who in the Cobden movement were charac-
teristically supported by Dissent* * (conclusion, p. 558) ; bourgeois character,
see conclusion p . 573: “It is now, however, one of the achievements of Ascetic
Protestantism that it worked against these tendencies : the ‘idolizing of the
creature’, the desire to secure the splendor familiae through the immobilization
of property in order to bring in a large income, the aristocratic joy in ‘high
life*, the voluptuous wallowing in aesthetic enjoyment and ‘selfish indulgence’
as well as the desire for insolent ostentation.” This bourgeois development is,
in my opinion, one of the main problems of our subject, and its causes are
still most obscure; cf. the remark by Weber: Antikritisches, p. 188: “The interest-
ing phenomenon which can be observed in the relation between the classes
and the religious life — almost in all countries — is the gradual transformation
of the originally (often even including the Baptist movement) vertical cleavage
in the social system (that is, group-formation conditioned by religion) into
a horizontal cleavage (that is, a situation in which religious characteristics
belong to certain classes in Society) ; this is where the materialistic ‘interpreta-
tion* of history steps in.” This interpretation has, however, not yet been
authenticated. 1$ the course of the whole of this book I have continually been
faced with this problem ; I have, however, only been able to offer some meagre
suggestions in explanation, especially on this point ; sometimes it seems to me
as though the minority position and exclusion from official life were the cause,
sometimes as though it were due to the inward logic of the Galvinistic ethic,
and often it seems as if both causes combined were the reason. In any case,
at the beginning the social classification played a much smaller part, and
humanistic secular culture and aristocratic customs predominated. There is a
great contrast between the Calvinism described by Afarcks in his Coligny and
that which is described by Dowden and Gobel. Also it remains to be proved how
far this shifting of emphasis was a general phenomenon.
888 (p. 644.) No one has ever asserted that Capitalism is the direct product
of Calvinism. We can, however, say that both possessed a certain affinity for
each other, that Calvinistic ethic of the “calling” and of work, which declares
that the earning of money with certain precautions is allowable, was able to
give it aiyntellectual and ethical backbone, and that, therefore, thus organized
and inwardly supported it vigorously developed, even though within the limits
of anti-mammon. “There is no doubt that where an economic system and a
‘spirit’ with which it has a certain affinity meet, there ensues a development
along uniform lines which is also inwardly unbroken (that is, where the spirit
and the economic system agree, which is not always the case), of the kind
which I had begun to analyse (that is, like the Calvinistic development).”
The conjunction of these two elements itself is an historic accident, as I have
said already in describing the similarly comparatively close affinity between
the mediaeval system and the Catholic ethic. But out of such accidents ( Weber:
Schlusswort , XXXI , p. 580): “Humanity which through the meeting of religious
and economic elements was created” ; p. 583: “Protestant asceticism created
for it (bourgeois capitalism) a positive ethic, a soul which needed that restless
activity in order that ‘spirit* and ‘form* might be one ” ; p. 588: A current of
psychic elements which arose from a very specific moral and religious source,
combined with capitalistic possibilities of development from which the great
historical developments proceed. The Christian ethic only attained a great
actual importance for world-history when it was supported by an “accident”
of this kind. In itself alone, when it did not receive this support, it simply remained
gi 6 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
in the realm of theory. The combination of these elements then reacted,
however, upon the religious and ethical spirit, as I prove in both instances.
In the history of the Christian ethic there have only been two “accidents” of
this kind, the mediaeval system and the Calvinistic system, whose expansion
through the bourgeois sect will be demonstrated in the next section. There are
other certainly often finer and deeper conceptions of the Christian Ethos to
whom an historic influence of this kind was denied, because they were not
favoured by such an “accident” or in their very nature were unable to find
such support. If I speak here of “accident**, this is naturally meant logically,
i.e. that here there is no immanent development, not that these things have
happened sine Deo. r
889a (p. 645.) The rise and the nature of the “Capitalist system** is, as is well
known, the main problem of economic and theoretical research at the present
day. Analyses of the system are given by Weber: Prot. Ethik , XX, pp . 11-35;
Sombart: Die Juden und das Wirtschaftsleben , igu, pp. 186-158; and in his well-
known earlier works, Deutsches Wirtschaftsleben des ig. Jahrh., and, above all,
Der Kapitalismus; see also the article K. by Traub , in RGG. An account of the
“system** in England is given by Held: Z ur sozialen Geschichte Englands , in
which there are excellent observations on social history in general. Held lays
more emphasis upon the external technical and other reasons for the growth of
the system. He only deals with the spiritual and ethical foundations in the
analysis of the theories of students of politics and political economy ; but he
does not follow the subject into the real popular ethos. Weber, however, has
dealt with this question in studying the problem of the rise and nature of the
“Spirit of Capitalism’*, Sombart in studying the problem as a question of the
“economic spirit” ( Wirtschaftsgesinnung ), and both have explored the depths of
the popular religious ethos. For the difference between the “Spirit of Capitalism”
and “the Capitalistic system”, which do not need to coincide, and often do not
coincide, see Weber: Antikritisches , pp. 201-202. The domination of Capitalism
over the minds of men does not take place until by “accident” both these
elements meet. Rachfahl cannot understand this distinction, and he only makes
fun of it. Further, I wish to emphasize that Weber and Sombart are mainly
concerned with the attempt to lay bare the nature of Capitalism, and the
religious and ethical elements are only of secondary importance. My aim, on
the other hand, is to make clear the significance of Capitalism in the develop-
ment of Calvinism. Thus behind our researches the points of view are very
different.
890 (p. 645.) This is very clearly analysed by Weber: Schlusswort, XXXI, 582 ff.:
“Of course at all periods praise and commendation for conscientious work have
always been given to the laity (although only in a limited way in primitive
Christianity, more among the Cynics).
“Luther’s expressions of opinion in this direction are well known. Outside
Protestantism, of course, there have been those who have taught the blessing
that rests on secular work. But of what use is this if, as in Lutheranism, there
are no rewards (in this case spiritual) for this way of life which will ensure
that these theories will be put into practice? Or if, as in Catholicism, far greater
rewards are offered for quite a different kind of behaviour, and further, when
in the form of the confessional a means is given which over and over again
makes it possible for the individual to unburden his mind of all kinds of errors
which he has committed against the postulates of the Church? Whereas, on
the other hand, Calvinism, in its development after the latter part of the
sixteenth century, and similarly the Baptist movement in the idea of the
PROTESTANTISM
9i7
necessity of ascetic proof, in life in general, and specially also in the life in one’s
‘calling’, as the subjective guarantee of the certitudo salutis — as one of the most
important signs of one’s own certainty of election — created a very specific
spiritual reward, which in its effectiveness within this sphere cannot easily be
excelled for the ascetic way of life which it required.”
392 (p. 647.) This is one of the most important results of Max Weber's study.
Only later on shall we be able to see its full significance, when, after the
analysis of the Protestant sects, we come to the collective conception of Ascetic
Protestantism. I maintain that these conclusions are right, although they have
been criticized by Rachfahl ; Rachfahl , indeed, admits the fact, but he allows
much les^ significance to be attributed to its significance for the development
of economic history, and he is determined not to grant that it arises definitely
from the spirit of Calvinism. In the first place he has, indeed, alluded to the
exceptions which Weber has made, which of course allow for the existence
of a number of other motives which have contributed to the rise of modern
Capitalism; Weber, indeed, names some quite different groups as supporters
of this development, but R. has not taken them into account. In the second
place, his knowledge of the doctrine of Calvin and of primitive conditions in
Geneva is only indirect, and gained from the works of Kampschulte , Elster , and
Lang, and, therefore, he misinterprets both in the political and in the economic
sphere the consequences of the most distinctive religious thought of Geneva.
He considers Calvin a traditionalist in the Lutheran sense ; the only difference
is that he thinks that Calvin has a broader view on the subject of interest,
and that otherwise he emphasizes honesty and seriousness in work, that is,
the various ethical elements in economic life. Otherwise, like Kampschulte, he
regards Calvinism as an exaltation of religious feeling which is contrary to
Nature, can only last a short time, and is unable to do anything great in the
secular sphere. Rachfahl considers that modern progress is due to the Rationalists,
and to Christians of the school of Erasmus who practise toleration, and also to
the comparative emancipation of the Protestant State from religious considera-
tions. The whole constitutes a defence of toleration in the wrong place. But
toleration by itself does not mean anything in economic development ; it all
depends upon the economic nature of that which is allowed to be tolerated.
This is veg-y well illustrated by Bastide , p. 214, where he is dealing with tolera-
tion in England : “The example of Holland had struck the English ; Sir William
Temple . . . attributed the prosperity of this country to religious liberty and
to the presence of numerous refugees. Finally, the arrival of the Huguenots
(after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes), who were fleeing from persecution,
and who made a great impression by their industrious habits and the quality
of their work, confirmed the idea that the religious exile is a great help to
public wealth. Sir W. Petty said that ‘commerce is practised most vigorously
in all states and under all governments by the heterodox section of the nation,
and by those who profess opinions different from those which are officially
received*. We can remember what importance Shaftesbury gave to the economic
argument in his Memorandum on toleration. This argument often reappears.
Charles Wolseley ... in a little treatise upon liberty of conscience, mentions
the departure for Holland of the dissenting weavers of Norwich. An anonymous
author . . . without insisting ... on the theological side of the question . . .
replied to Dr. Dove ‘that religious liberty was the school of noble and generous
souls’. The artisans of Norwich who have emigrated are the best citizens :
‘Are not the men who have religious principles sensible and serious men who
do good to a nation? Are they not generally in all forms of trade and in other
gi8 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
callings the most industrious and the most prosperous?* ** It is clear that here
the allusion is not to toleration in itself, but to the acceptance or retention of
a certain class of citizens ; these citizens are precisely the Calvinists with their
well-known commercial qualities. It is also clear, as these authors observe,
that the experience of religious oppression and exclusion fosters the growth of
those business qualities, and, finally, that these qualities are connected with
moral and religious principles. We might produce similar arguments in favour
of the Baptist and Pietist sects, who also, through similar experiences, develop
similar qualities upon a similar foundation of religion and ethics. It is not
Calvinism itself which is here being considered, but Calvinism as it has
developed in the school of oppression and as a minority. This development,
however, is still connected with the fundamental Calvinistic ethic in general,
and with its economic ethic in particular. There have also been Catholic
minorities in England, but we never hear anything of this kind about them.
Cf. also Weber in Antikritisches , Schlusswort , XXXI, pp. 565-569, and Antikritisches ,
XXX , 162-188 . — This toleration has also been to the advantage of the Jews.
Sombart has made a study of their significance similar to that made by Weber
on Calvinism and the sects. In my opinion, however, Sombart has overestimated
and misinterpreted the r61e of the Jews. He is certainly wrong in his comparison
between Puritanism and Judaism, based on the argument that the Calvinists
lay so much emphasis upon the Old Testament. For the Calvinistic economic
spirit is quite different from that of Judaism, and their connection with the
Old Testament is very complicated ; see above, pp. 658-640. Many resemblances,
however, have been noted.
993 (P- 650.) Calvin is an opponent of Baptist communism, against which he
strives repeatedly, precisely for social reasons ; for when all had sold their goods
the rich would have to beg, and no one would have a house in which to dwell,
or in which the poor could be sheltered ( R ., XXXV , p. 488). Otherwise his way
of thinking is definitely social on a religious basis ; see, for instance, the summary
of Christian ethics (Inst. Ill , pp. 7-10 ), which forms a supplement to the explana-
tion of the Decalogue (II, 8), and deepens it with the Christian point of view :
“Nostri non sumus : Inde consequitur, ut ne quaeramus, quae nostra sunt, sed
quae ex Domini sunt voluntate et faciunt ad gloriam ejus promovendam. . . .
Quum enim nos privatam nostri rationem omittere jubet scriptura, iion modo
habendi cupiditatem, potentiae affectionem, hominum gratiam ex animis
nostris eradit, sed ambitionem quoque et omnem gloriae humanae appetitum
aliasque secretiores pestes eradicat” (III, 7, 2). “Perspicimus abnegationem
nostri partim quidem in homines respicere partim in Deum** (III, 7, 5). Then
follows the development of the first idea : “Jam inquaerenda proximi utilitate
officium praestare, quantum habet difficultatis ! ... At Scriptura, ut eo nos
manuducat, praemonet quidquid a Domino gratiarum obtinemus, esse nobis
hac lege concreditum, ut in commune ecclesiae (that is, the whole Christian
society) bonum conferatur ideoque legitimam gratiarum omnium usum esse
liberalem ac benignam cum aliis communicationem.** All possessions are
“deposita Dei ea lege fidei nostrae commissa, ut in proximorum bonum
dispensentur”. There then follows the well-known Pauline parable of the
organism : “Nullum membrum suam facultatem sibi habet nec in privatum
usum applicat, sed ad socia membra transfundit. . . . Sic pius vir, quidquid
potest, fratribus debet posse : sibi non aliter privatim consulendo, quam ut ad
communem ecclesiae aedificationem intentus sit animus. Haec itaque . . .
nobis sit method us : quidquid in nos Deus contulit, quo proximum queamus
adjuvare, ejus nos esse oeconomos, qui ad reddendam dispensations rationem
PROTESTANTISM
9i9
adstringimur. Earn demum porro rectam esse dispensationem, quae ad dilec-
tionis exigatur regulam. Ita fiet, ut non modo alieni commodi studium cum
popriae utilitatis cura semper conjungamus, sed hanc illi subjiciamus” (///, 7,5).
At the same time we have to remember “non hominum malitiam reputandam
esse, sed inspiciendam in ilJis Dei imaginem : quae inductis et obliterate eorum
delictis ad eos amandos, amplexandosque sua pulcritudine ac dignitate nos
alliciat” (III, 7, 6 ). “Ita secum quisque cogitabit, se, quantus quantus est,
proximis debitorem rei esse, nec alium exercendae ergo ipsos beneficentiae
statuendum esse finem, nisi quum facultates deficiunt : quae quam late exten-
duntur, ad caritatis regulam limitari debet” (III, 7, 7). This is an absolute
programme of Christian Socialism. — This point of view also determines Calvin’s
insistence on the restriction of interest, his fight against usury, the civil legisla-
tion about trade and consumption, and, above all, the establishment of the
Church system of poor relief and social welfare. The Compagnie , under Beza,
worked in the same direction, keeping their hand on the control of public life ;
Choisy gives many illustrations of this point. On the question of the care of the
poor and the enormous sums which were spent on this, see Uhlhorn: Liebestatig -
keit, III, 141-169 and Choisy in general. — Where Church and State were not
united the Christian social development was simply an intensive affair of the
congregation itself, as in the refugee community in London organized by
John k Lasko, and in the communities organized after the same pattern in the
Netherlands and on the Lower Rhine ; on this point see Simons: Eine altkolnischc
Seelsorgegemeinde, 1894, Aelteste evangelische Gemeindearmenpflege vom Niederrhein ,
1 899 , Niederrheinisches Synodal- und Gemeindeleben unter dem Kreuz, 1897; here p. 20:
“Thus the Synod, from the modern point of view, is not very far removed from
Christian Socialism.” For the Elizabethan social legislation, and its connection
with Puritan ideas, see the work by Cunningham, which has already been men-
tioned, and Held, 16-98. — On these restrictions and the fact that the Calvinistic
ethic also retained the pretium justum, see Weber: Antikritisches , XXX, 188, 194,
201 jf.; also Laspeyres: Geschichte der Volkswirtschaftlichen Anschauungen der
Nieder l cinder, 1863, pp. 256-270: theological views on Capitalism which, it is true,
admit the taking of interest, but which would like to see it restricted, with
consideration for the poor ; on the other hand, attention is drawn also to the
strongly geological elements in the economic theories even of non-theological
thinkers (p. 31). Characteristically Calvinistic is the formula for the under-
takings in Brazil (p. 82): “De hooghste Wet, rakende Brasil, behoovt te wesen
de Eere Gods ende de Welstand der Participanten.”
894 (p* 65°-) There are some characteristic remarks in a letter of Calvin to
Bullinger (Brief e, 1,342): “We must also take this city into account, and indeed
we must give it a very prominent position in our thoughts. If I were thinking
only of my own life or of my own circumstances, I could go somewhere else
at once. But when I consider how important this corner of the world is for the
extension of the Kingdom of Christ, I am sure I am right to do all I can to
protect it.” Calvin then goes on to advise a treaty with France, which he thinks
is allowable, since Abraham made a covenant with the heathen Abimelech,
and Isaac and David likewise made covenants with the heathen for the purpose
of the Kingdom of God.
8,7 (p. 651.) Calvin’s teaching on war, Inst. IV, 20, 11, and 12; the vigorous
passage which defends war only appears in the later editions. The cause of
Christ is only to be served through confession of faith, organization, breaking
with the Catholic Church, suffering and endurance and trust in God. Human
power is to be unconditionally renounced ; if it is necessary, God will work a
920 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
miracle to save His Church. Numerous passages in the Letters take this point
of view. Everywhere Calvin advised against taking up arms, and often on
occasions which were either very favourable to the Calvinists, or times of
great necessity.
898 (p. 651.) This change of view comes out in several passages in Calvin’s
Letters , /, 341 ; in connection with the plan for a treaty with France, which
might lead to France going to war with Charles V ; in spite of all scruples he
thinks that “we might ascribe it more to a blameworthy sense of security than
to genuine trust in God, if we were to ignore means of assistance which, even
though not desirable, are still permitted” ! II, 33: Calvin blames the Germans,
who in 1555, by their laziness, threw away their chances of being protected by
God, and therefore had so little success in war. II, 327: writing to Bullinger:
“Believe me, I can assure you certainly that there is no danger of disturbance
on our side unless the King of Navarre is openly attacked. In his defence,
certainly, I hope that many would rise and fight.” II, 343: he deplores the
rising of the Savoy Protestants against their lord. Ill, 442: he counsels the
Calvinistic commandant of Lyons, in a very conditional way, to lay down his
arms: “Further, if both wish to come to terms with you there would still have
to be a legal basis for this, for without their help you cannot . . . carry the
matter through. For something which has been begun without being called
to it, and justified in it, can never work out well. I do not say that perhaps
a good reason could not be found, but I do not know one, and on that account
I would not venture to advise war to begin without being better informed.”
Here also Calvin’s thought is not uniform, since if a legitimate reason can be
produced both civil war and a war of religion are permitted. This also is the
interpretation given by Marcks in his book on Coligny, pp. 338 , 361 , 380 , especially
408; finally, it comes to this, that a legal reason has to be found to justify a war;
this is where sophistry begins.
309 (p. 651.) De jure magistratuum , 280. If the Estates and the magistratus
inferiores are not strong enough to control the tyrant, then it becomes permissible
to call in help from outside: “Licebit etiam saniori parti oppressae auxilia
aliunde conquirere, praesertim apud Regni confoederatos et amicos.” He
gives examples from the history of Israel, and of the Romans, and also recalls
what was done by the Italian patricians through Charles the Great against the
Lombards. In itself, however, the Kingdom of Christ has nothing to do with
fighting: “Cum religio ad conscientias pertineat, quibus nullo modo vis inferri
potest, non videtur ilia ullis armis stabilienda et defendenda, quam ideo
pracdicatione verbi Dei, precibus ac patientia hactenus potius propagatam
conspicimus. Extant praeterea loci permulti in scripturis, quibus ostenditur,
quanta sit inter regna hujus mundi et regnum Christi spirituale differentia”
( p . 234). To that are added the examples of the Prophets, of Christ, and of the
Apostles. Only in those days there were no Christian lower magistrates. They
confronted purely pagan governments, from whom they could not require any
help for the cause of Christ, and to which they had to submit and suffer. Since
now, however, there is a Christian State, with lower magistrates who have a
duty laid upon them by God, the whole matter is quite different. “At ego
contra praecipuum optimi piique Magistratus munus esse dico, ut quidquid
mediorum autoritatis et potentiae illi a Deo concessum est, hue totum omnino
conferat, ut inter sibi subditos Deus ipse vere agnoscatur agnitusque tanquam
summus regum omnium rex colatur et adoretur.” Thus the authorities must
establish the true religion, even by force of arms if necessary among their own
subjects first, then, however, also among others. Certainly all in a legitimate
PROTESTANTISM
921
way. The introduction of the true religion into a country can only take place
with pure Divine means. “Hoc enim proprie Spiritus sancti opus est instrumentis
spiritualibus utentis. ,, Thus the knowledge of the true religion is to be spread
through preaching, and only those who resist in an obstinate way are finally
to be compelled to accept it! Where, however, the pure religion is already
established by law, there the authorities are under the obligation under certain
circumstances to assist the realization of this legal position, also by force of arms.
Christ and the apostles were private individuals, and had to remain within the
limits of their “calling”, avoiding the use of arms. But the magistrates of a
Christian State are, if there is no help for it, justified and obliged to resort to
arms. They arc also justified in calling on the aid of foreign nations ; this state-
ment is supported with many examples. This problem is treated similarly by
the Monarchomachi , Elkan , pp. 116 and i68ff., Cardauns, pp. 5, 104 , where the
passage from the Vindiciae is quoted: “ ‘Universam (Ecclesiam) singulis,
singulas ejus partes universis commisit Deus ; itaque si unam ejus partem prin-
ceps religionis illius curet, alteram vero oppressam, si opera ferre possit deserat
et negligat, Ecclesiam deseruisse censetur.’ It is one of the established legal
principles of the period that a prince of another nation may intervene to save
a people oppressed by a tyrannical government.”
400 (p. 652.) This pacificism is emphasized by Hartmann: Engl. Frommigkeit ,
p. 26. H. Oncken is instructive, Amerika und die grossen Mdchte ( Studien und
Versuche zur neueren Geschichte , dedicated to Max Lenz y 1910 ), pp. 427 ff.: “One of
the peculiar results of the Colonial situation of this State was that from the
very beginning it was comparatively independent of foreign politics and its
dangers. And, at least among the Puritan and Baptist elements, it was taken
for granted that war, the sorrowful privilege of monarchies and oligarchies,
was to be renounced for religious and democratic reasons. . . . The predomin-
ance of religious feeling, which affected the development of this State behind the
scenes in a great variety of ways, required insistently that the people of God
should be sufficient unto themselves, and carry on their affairs without the use
of arms ; strict abstention from foreign policy also produced that fundamental
rationalistic utilitarian element in the American nature which arose from
sources affected by Natural Law.” But,/). 469: “The first century of American
history already shows that even a commonwealth which, from the days of the
Pilgrim Fathers, was controlled by opposite influences, in the long run has to
obey those laws, which, as inherent necessities, belong to the essence of the
State and of dominion.” More on this subject in Oncken: Amerikanischer Im-
perialisms und europaischer Pacifisms, Press. Jahrbb., 1911. Likewise, only with
a different point of view and outlook for the future, Msaryk in a splendid
article on Roosevelt from Mdrz , 1910, Nos. 12 and 13.
401 (p. 653.) Cf. Gss and Luthardt; Alex. Schweizcr: Die Entwickelung des
Moralsystems in der reformierten Kirche , Theol. Studd. und Kritt., 1830. In all these
works the development of ethics from the point of view of its content is very
largely ignored in favour of questions of the relation between philosophical and
theological ethics, of freedom and the miracle of grace, of justification and of
the moral law, statements of the problem which unfortunately usually almost
exclusively dominate the theological treatment of ethics. There is more on the
content of ethics in the History of Ethics within Organized Christianity , by Thomas
Hall, New York, 1910.
402 (p. 654.) On this point see Rieker: Reformierte Kirchenverfassung; Sohm:
Kirchenrecht, pp. 642-657; von Hofmann: Kirchenverfassungrecht der niederlandischen
Reformierten; Choisy: La Thiocratie and Uitat chritien ; also his inaugural lecture,
922 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
L'itat chritien calviniste au 16 *** stick, igog. Here there is a pertinent emphasis
upon the meaning of the Communion ( p . u): “The Communion is, in fact,
in the Christian State, an act of obligation, a social and civic act. By participa-
tion in the Holy Communion the citizen and the inhabitant of Geneva professes
his faith in the only true God and manifests his intention to submit to His Law.
It is the homage rendered by the Christian to the Sovereign Legislator and
Protector of the city, and to Jesus Christ His Son, the Redeemer, the Supreme
Head of the Church. This is why one cannot admit to the Holy Table those
who openly violate the Law of God and shamefully outrage His truth. This is
why, on the other hand, no one can be permitted to abstain from Communion
without having been officially or publicly excluded from participation in the
Holy Communion. However, even although it is a civic act, and thus obligatory,
the Communion ought to be an act of personal piety, etc.” Sociologically, the
Communion exercises the same function as the Sacrament of Penance in
Catholicism, hence both attain a power of organization which does not
characterize Lutheranism.
403 (P* 655.) On this point I only venture to express my opinion with some
reserve, since there are no works dealing with this theory of Society. The
absence of the doctrine of the Three Estates is emphasized by Ricker , p. 184 ,
organization according to possessions in the laws on luxury in Elster , pp. 190-192,
the continuance of the categories of “callings” and guilds in Choisy , p. 118 ,
note 3, and Gierke: Althusius 2 , 24. Here the “callings” are all treated as con -
sociationes collegarum , p. 22 , at the same time it is pointed out that they are
“entirely free associations, which can be formed and severed at will”. On
equality in the sight of God, see Choisy: L'itat chritien , pp. 484~4 qo. Here also
belongs the careful avoidance by the ministers of all Amtswiirde (dignity of
the ministry), which does not allow the development of a conception similar
to that of the Lutheran conception of the ministry. Concerning the peasantry,
its neglect is deplored ; see Althusius , p. 25. On the democratic consequence of
religious equality, see Rieker, p. 122.
404 (P* 655 •) Cf. Brief e, 7 , 256 on the subject of the necessity for a mutual
attraction to the knowledge of each other, as the presupposition of marriage,
its relation to the aim of the holy community ( 7 , 331 and 369 ) ; on the equal
position of male and female in Christ, and the duties of women compared
with those of the greatest heroes ( 77 , 193) (to the imprisoned women in Paris) ;
equality of husband and wife ( 77 , 268 and 451 ) ; always, however, the husband
is the head of the wife ( 77 , 391 ) ; for the attitude of the State legislation and of
the Board of Discipline in the control of the sex-life, see numerous examples in
Choisy: L'itat chritien , especially p. 401 ; for the significance of marriage for
Society (p. 487) ; on the whole subject, Elster , pp. ig4 ff., and the fine description
by von Schulze-Gavernitz: Britischer Imperialismus , pp. 47-49: “Puritanism prepared
the way for a view of sex-relationships which places the responsibility contained
in procreation in the foreground, and makes possible an ethical construction
of sex-relationships from the standpoint of the child.” — A monograph on this
subject would be of great assistance.
405 (p* 659.) Gobel has rightly recognized this connection with the problem
of numbers of the masses and of the Christian civilization of the people, and
in both directions, i.e. the Free Church movement and Pietism, he has em-
phasized its significance ; he has also seen clearly the resemblance to the Baptist
movement. The problem began with the exiled communities in foreign lands,
the Church under k Lasko in London, the Lutheran Calvinistic community
in Frankfort, and the Dutch groups of exiles on the Lower Rhine (Gdbel, 7 , 326).
PROTESTANTISM
923
Here the communities became thoroughly democratic (/, 340 ff.), they had to
choose their own officials, and they had no connection with the civil authority.
Of decisive importance was the community in London under John k Lasko.
Gobel calls it “a wholesome reconciliation between the Lutherans and their
lack of a constitution and the Separatist Baptists, and thus he made possible
upon German soil the founding of a Reformed Church which holds a central
position between both” ( p . 326). “Under its freely elected preachers and elders
it constituted itself independently of the bishop and the parish clergy, quite
freely, according to its own principles; this, however, produced within it a
clearly marked independent partially Separatist character, which distinguished
it from the rest of the secular and civic life around ; when, therefore, this
community migrated, and in an expanded form settled in Emden, Wesel,
Frankfort, and Strassburg, and when it spread still farther in the region round
the Main, and especially in the Rhineland, it was, of course, natural that the
Calvinistic Church which it established in those places naturally bore the same
kind of ecclesiastical character, and that in its flourishing Christian life it bore
the stamp of decision and bluntness, of world-renunciation and of hostility to
the world” (336). The same is true of the older communities in the Netherlands
before they regained the character of a State Church, which, moreover, was
always only comparative, as von Hofmann shows ; it is also true of the English
Puritans, as soon as they were forced into opposition after 1567 by the harsh
Elizabethan legislation, see Kattenbusch Art. Puritanismus in PRE 3 : they formed
“private associations which were usually called ‘prophesyings’. The name was
based upon 1 Cor. xiv. 13. They were societies for mutual edification and for
the furtherance of a Christian life, and they originated in the community led
by John k Lasko” ; at the same time the tendency towards Presbyterianism
was developed: “The secular authority has no power over the Church”;
they desire “the complete autonomy of the Church”, which for the time being
was only possible in the form of separation. — Cf. further the description of the
important resolution of the Synod of Emden, 1571, in Gobel , /, 418: “Thus in
Emden there was established a Church-order which was set up not for a whole
country, nor for a whole town, nor for a whole people, but only for those who
joined it of their own free-will, and who submitted themselves to its order and
Church discipline, and therefore also could leave it again at any moment.”
This applied first of all to the communities in the Netherlands. The connection
between this new Church principle and the opposition of the State authorities
on the one hand, and with the difficulties of a mass and popular Christianity
on the other, is developed (/, 423). On the analogy of this Church-order and
sect-type, see /, 443: “In general the whole (Lower Rhine) Church . . . would
have gradually fallen into the danger of remaining a sect, or of becoming
one again; if, on the one hand, they had not remained in connection with
the at least outwardly strong and flourishing National Church of the Nether-
lands, and if they had not been preserved from such shrinkage by the develop-
ment of their theology which took place in a splendid way at the Universities
of Leyden (from 1575) and Franeker (from 1585), and, on the other hand,
the union of synods, and, after 1609, their unexpected liberty and extraordinary
expansion. All these things laid upon this Church the task of becoming, at
least to some extent, a national or a territorial Church, and thus of leavening
the whole country and the whole people with its own spirit. In spite of that,
however, our Calvinistic Church could never entirely deny its Separatist
origin, and there remained, therefore, within it the opposition between the
world and Christianity, between the worldling and the Christian, between
924 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
human statements and the Word of God, between the Papacy and the Gospel,
so that as Church discipline slackened and the Church and Christian life
became more secular, attempts were ever made anew, both from outside and
from inside the Church, to restore the old severity and keenness, whether
through the gathering together of individual awakened souls within the
congregation, or through the separation of the latter from the great secularized
Church, and the formation of special groups of their own.” This explains even
at the present time the character of Church life in the Wuppertal and the
Pietism of Elberfeld and Barmen. This applies, however, also mutatis mutandis
to all territories in which Calvinism is predominant, owing to the idea of the
holy community and of ecclesiastical autonomy over against the Stafce.
406 (p. 660.) For the development of the ‘‘subsidiary Calvinistic conception
of the Church”, cf. Rieker , pp. 190-203; Kuyper , 52-60, y 1-100, sees in this the
distinctive fundamental tendency of Calvinism which was not quite plain to
its early leaders; the excellent book by Rothenbiicher : Die Trennung von Stoat und
Kirche , 1908, describes the rise and the nature of the principle ; the enthusiastic
religious glorification of the principle as that of modern religion and the
Church in general in A. Vinet: Essai sur la manifestation des convictions religieuses,
et sur la separation de I'tglise de Vttat , 1842 (translated into Geunan by Spengler ,
1845 ), and also La liberti des Cultes 2 , 1892. Cf. also Troeltsch : Trennung von Staat
und Kirche , der Staatliche Religionsunterricht und die theologischen Fakultdten , 1907;
to my joy Rothenbiicher agrees essentially with the account I have given here
of the Baptist movement and its origin. For the “Natural-Law” character of
the Calvinistic Church conception, see Sohm: Kirchenrecht , /, 655 ff., 697 ff.
407 (p. 661.) It is extremely important to emphasize the fact that in early
Calvinism the conception of Truth was such that it made it impossible for it
to renounce dependence on the brachium saeculare , or to allow different forms
of Church life to exist alongside of each other; cf. Troeltsch: Trennung , etc.
When the Netherlanders wanted to organize their Church life upon lines which
made room for the existence of various churches, the Genevese characterized
this as a despicable principle of toleration like that advocated by Castellio :
Rachfahl , II, 727-75/. The churches of the Lower Rhine, which were practically
Free Churches, still retained explicitly the idea of a State Church as the normal
thing ; see Simons: Freikirche , Volks kirche, Landeskirche, 1895, p. 12. WhenjCalvinists
found themselves under Catholic rule, and were forced to organize on Free
Church lines, they always did it as a temporary arrangement, expecting the
victory of the Truth, and maintaining that it is the duty of a ruler to submit
to the Truth ( Rachfahl , II, p. 881 ; Rothenbiicher , p. 20). Where the hope of victory
had been given up, and the Calvinistic Church life had to be organized along-
side of other confessions, this still did not mean a general spirit of ecclesiastical
liberty, it simply meant that toleration was restricted to Catholicism, Lutheran-
ism, and Calvinism ; it is the toleration of minorities when there is no help for it,
but it is not the principle of liberty of worship and of conscience ; see Rachfahl ,
//, p. 72#, and Frank Puaux: Les pricurseurs frangais de la tolirance au iy^ m * siicle,
Paris, 1881; Rothenbiicher, p. 63. The Pilgrim Fathers returned to a strict
theocracy, in which the Baptists were punished with death because they
represented the idea of toleration ( Rothenbiicher , 1 20-1 23 ). — Nor is it possible to
say that Calvinism was organized on voluntaryist lines. Rieker has asserted this
against Sohm, who claims that there is a relationship between Calvinism and
the Law of Nature, and he might have emphasized it still more strongly (see
P • 133 )• Independency is expressly rejected (see p. 82), and Simons: Nieder-
rheinisches Synodal - und Gemeindeleben , 189J, p. 75. The idea of a contract, held so
PROTESTANTISM
925
strongly by Calvinism, applies to the State and the relation to the State, but
not to the rise of the Church itself, as Rieker himself makes plain ( p . 79). In the
refugee churches of John k Lasko, which lived under a government with a
different religious outlook, and then in the Netherlands, H. von Hoffmann (Das
Kirchenverfassungsrecht der niederlandischen Reformierten , 1902) makes it plain that
the Church membership, both of those who had previously belonged to other
forms of religion and of those who were already baptized, was only gained
“through a covenant (contract)”; thus for the first time the Church here
appears as a corporation, in the sense in which the word is used in modern
law ( p . 86). Only the expression is expanded in modern legal language, and in
this case it is not quite applicable since the correlated idea of a “right to leave
the Church ( Austrittsrecht )” does not exist ( p . 83). All that it comes to really is
this, that it provides a way by which individuals could take a personal share
in an institution which existed by Divine appointment ; the Church Council,
however, was always regarded as the primary method for exercising the royal
sovereignty of Christ ; thus, wherever there is such a centre, it is the duty of
individuals to join this institution, which is the one and only body in which
Truth and Redemption reside (see pp. 87 , 88, 75, and 96) ! Freedom to form
churches on a voluntary basis is not a Calvinistic idea, but it comes from the
Congregationalists and the Baptists ; see Rothenbiicher, p. 90. Calvinism, there-
fore, has always used it only for the outward constitutional form, it has never
formed part of its nature ; see Rieker , 1 90-174. — The “Natural-Law” conception
of the Church is, moreover, an intellectual method, which has grown out of
the juridical way of thinking ; it has been used by all kinds of churches, and
can easily be used in support of the idea of an institutional Church. In my
opinion it has nothing whatever to do with the Calvinistic idea of the Church ;
see Rothenbiicher , 68-72. — On the Scottish Covenants (with to some extent the
text of the same), see Champlin Barrage: The Church Covenant Idea , Its Origin and
Development , Philadelphia, 1904. — That in the Free Church movement there is at
bottom a new conception of Truth which differs from that of early Calvinism
is shown characteristically by Vinet: Darlegungen, p. 276 : “If the National
Church system were to make an end of all sects, or were to make it impossible
for them to arise, this would not be a cause for triumph, but for reproach. . . .
There is qp life where there are no sects ; uniformity is a sign of death.” Cf. also
p. 278 and p. 206. “It has been said that seeking for the Truth is more important
than the Truth itself ; this might also be applied to religion in general, if, as we
believe, it is right to say the first of all truths is that we ought to wish and seek
for the Truth. The Truth is only half-realized if it is not sought. Here seeking
is as important as possession. . . . This, we admit, is the heart of our theory”
(p. 299). The real State Church system only arose, according to Vinet, out of the
Reformation, and he considers that it is something which ought never to
have been born (p. 279). Historically Vinet appeals chiefly to America (p. 996 ) ;
this also illustrates the connection between the Free Church principle and
democracy (p. 966). This democracy, however, only means the right of the
people to self-determination ; it does not mean a democratic Church con-
stitution, and there is no equalitarian removal of that patriarchalism in Society
or in the sociological fundamental theory (p. 977). Vinet considers this
genuine Calvinism, but in reality it is spiritual idealism with its subjective
tendencies,
408 (p. 662.) On the whole subject, see the excellent article in PRE* by
hoofs entitled Kongregationalismus. The great work by Dexter: Congregationalism
of the Last Three Hundred Years , New York , 1880, is out of print, and I was unable
926 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
to obtain it. Further, see the highly interesting book by Burrage: The Church
Covenant Idea , which gives numerous examples of these Covenants in full, follows
their development, and treats in detail their resemblance to and connection
with the Baptist movement; see p. 46: “In the same year, 1580, it is now
generally admitted, Browne very likely came into contact with foreign Ana-
baptists, and doubtless learned their simple ideas of forming their brotherhood
churches or societies by a Bundy or a covenant with God. Their idea was that
a Church may be composed only of believers. Browne accepted this view, but,
following the opinion of his time in general, added, ‘and their seed*. ... It may
be added that neither Browne nor any of his earlier followers seem to have
been influenced to any great extent by the Scottish Covenants.” Further, the
Covenant of the Brownists, and of all other Covenants, was not merely a
Covenant with God, but also with their fellow Church members; see the
passage in Browne's own Book which showeth the life and manners of all true
Christians, p. 57: “How must the Church be first planted and gathered under
one kind of government? First by a Covenant and condition made in God’s
behalfe. Secondly, by a Covenant and condition made on our behalfe. Thirdly,
by using the sacrament of Baptisme to seale those conditions and Covenants.”
Cf. further Burrage: The true story of Robert Browne (1550?- 1633), Oxford , igo6.
Here are the most important “spiritual” passages, p. 36: “There (speaking
against the external Churchmanship of the Anglicans) is no duty, law, deed,
cause, question, or plea, etc., which ought not to be spiritual, or is not deter-
mined by the Divine and spiritual right, law and Word of God.” P. 20: Con-
fronting Anglicans and Presbyterians he gives the motto: “The Kingdom of
God should be within you.” P. 21 , against the use of Latin: “They spake the
languages, saith the Scripture, as the Spirit gave them utterance.” This con-
nection with “spiritual” religion is still more important than that with the
Baptist movement ; on the difference between both see below. To Burrage we
owe the discovery of several of Browne’s writings, upon which his new book is
based: The Retractation of R. B., 1907, and A New Tear's Gift , 1904 ; for the use
of these two books I am indebted to the kindness of the publisher.
409 (p. 663.) On this point, see Powicke: Henry Barrow, Separatist {1550?- 1593),
London, 1900 , a very instructive book and most illuminating for the Church-
history of the period. Here (pp. 215 ff.): “On the whole it may b^said that
Barrow was far nearer to the Anabaptists than he knew. . . . Indeed, apart
from a number of comparatively superficial differences, due partly to circum-
stances, and partly to a more scrupulous fidelity to their common principle of
reverence for Scripture — there was nothing in the sphere of Church practice
which need have held Barrow and the Baptists apart, except the doctrine of
Baptism. . . . But this refers only to his ecclesiastical position. As to theological
differences, the case is not the same. Here what meets us is diametrical opposi-
tion rather than development. Barrow was a Calvinist, and accepted all the
implications of this creed with full consent.” Powicke regards the retention of
Infant Baptism as due merely to his fear of being called an Anabaptist ; I believe,
however, that the deeper reasons which have already been mentioned were
the cause of this. He rejects both the Baptist doctrine of free will and also the
restriction of the body of the redeemed to those who have become members of
a voluntary Church; this means the connection with still another Church
conception ( p . 123) ; against equality (p. 94), asceticism (p. 149 ) ; we must note
anticipations of Quakerism ( p . 118): “B. anticipated George Fox in some
points, e.g. in his refusal to take an oath on the Bible; in his objection to
naming the days of the week, Sunday, Monday, etc., and in his dislike of
PROTESTANTISM
927
titles.” The Separatist-Baptist result of Puritanism (pp. 153 ff.) ; it is one of
Whitgift’s main arguments, and individual Puritans seem rather embarrassed
by Barrow. For the “spiritual” features, see especially the account on pp . 92-93*
where Barrow is being examined ; Barrow appeals to the exposition of Scripture
through the Spirit which is the fruit of the Word : “Andrews : ‘This savoureth
of a private spirit.* — Barrow : ‘This is the spirit of Christ and of His apostles,
and most publicly they submitted their doctrines to the trial of all men.
So do I.* — A. : ‘What, are you an apostle?* B. : ‘No, but I have the spirit of
the apostles.’ A.: ‘What, the spirit of the apostles?* B. : ‘Yes, the spirit of
the apostles.* A. : ‘What, in that measure?* B. : ‘In that measure that God has
imparted ynto me, though not in that measure that the apostles had by any
comparison. Yet the same spirit. There is but one spirit.* ** This seems to me
still more important than the resemblance to the Baptist movement, which is
also strongly emphasized by hoofs. Could it possibly be that Schwenkfeld’s
influence is behind this?
410 (p. 665.) On this point see in particular Burrage: The Church Covenant Idea ;
the possibility of developing in the direction of the Baptists, the Independents,
and a new conception of a Church of the people, pp. 167-169. “Yet certainly
they would not turn for rescue to the Baptists, whose baptism on profession of
faith they had spurned, and thus lay open their full indebtedness to Anabaptist
principles.** Powicke sees this question from the same point of view, showing very
clearly hpw the Puritans swayed between the idea of a Calvinistic National
Church and a Separatist voluntary Church; the opposition of Whitgift is
characteristic ; he held that without a settled authority in Church and State,
and without the agreement of both, the principle of the unity of Society was
threatened. — The transition from the State Church to Separatism was made
possible to the Puritans through the purchase of livings, when they then were
able to choose their own clergyman and remain loyal to him as a congregation ;
there were such cases even before Robert Browne, see Burrage: New Facts Con-
cerning Robinson , 1910, pp. 31 , 24 jf. Also frequently Puritan clergy, whose
preaching licence had been taken away from them preached in private houses
or in the open air, and gathered congregations round them on a personal basis ;
see Dexter: The England and Holland of the Pilgrims, Boston , 1906, p. 123.
411 (p. 666.) Cf. Loofs: Kongregationalismus ; in particular also Dexter's book,
which has Already been mentioned, which is full of detail on social and cultural
history, also the section in Powicke on the Amsterdam Church, and also that in
Burrage: Church Covenant , or the “ Half-way Covenant ", pp. 169-174. There also the
adoption of the Covenant principle by the Baptists. The ecclesiastical democracy
of the Barrowists was not really democratic in spirit, but it was regarded as the
agreement produced by the Spirit of Christ, and therefore supernatural in
character, for which reason it was always laid down that all resolutions should
proceed from prayer and meditation. Cf. Powicke (p. 271), where Ainsworth
declares : “Christ’s ruling power, which the Papists say is in the Pope, we say
not (as this man calumniateth us) that it is in the body of the congregation,
nor that it is in the prelates . . . nor (as the Puritans) that it is in the presby-
tery . . . but that it is in Christ Himself. . . . The Word of God is given to all
and every member of the Church to read and exercise privately ; but publicly —
in the Church — there is a double use of it in prophecy and in office.” Dexter
sums this up thus : “The mainspring of power for people and officers alike is
in the living Presence of Christ.** This is undoubtedly the point of view of
‘spiritual* religion; these statements exactly resemble those of Schwenkfeld ,
see Sippel: Schwenkfeld Ch . W, 1911, p. 869: The organization is, according to the
928 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
apostolic example, not the work of the believers, but that of the Holy Ghost.
The practical control of the community is not the business of certain elected
representatives, but of the living and ruling Christ. He alone represents the
government of the Church. Jesus rules in spirit through those who are endowed
with the gifts of the Spirit, both the individual congregation and the Church
as a whole. In the community of the faithful the charismatic offices and gifts,
according to i Cor. xii, manifest themselves for the common good. The famous
farewell discourse of Robinson ( Weingarten , 33; Dexter, 587), with his exhortation
to the group not to cling to his (Robinson’s) authority, but to expect and wait
for new illumination, is likewise conceived from the point of view of “spiritual”
religion ; but it is not, on that account, to be overestimated, since a spirituality
of this kind proceeds always from the Calvinistic interpretation of the Bible,
and is only rejected by a rigid ecclesiastical orthodoxy like that of Lutheranism
and Geneva. It is from this point of view that we must also understand Robin-
son’s later concessions in the direction of spiritual fellowship with the members
of other churches, and even his readiness in the settlement in Virginia to
acknowledge an external civil authority of the bishops ( Dexter , 568 ff.!); the
practice of lay-preaching and of the lay-criticism of the pastors is also to be
understood from this point of view. This does not exclude the idea that in
ideal conditions there ought to be only Congregationalist churches, and this is
what happened in New England. Dexter , 567 thus describes the aim of their
emigration: “Nor could they bring themselves to abandon the missionary
purpose which they had cherished from the first, that they might demonstrate
somewhere the value to mankind of a pure and democratic Church.” — For their
history and development in New England, see the important work by Doyle:
The English in America , London , 1887, and H. K. Caroll: The Religious Forces of
the United States , New York , 1833. A good deal oflight is thrown on this subject
by Roger Williams in his Bloudy Tenent , which will be discussed later; the
Congregationalist churches will not allow the existence of any other churches,
but they do not force all the colonists to become full members; in the first
case they preserve the Calvinist idea of unity ; in the second, the subjective
liberty of conscience ; of all they require outward conformity to the Law of
Nature and to the Christian moral law ; thus there is one section of the popula-
tion without any Church at all, but these people must at least hear the Word
of God ; see Bl. Ten., 250! '
412 (p. 669.) On this point see Carlyle: CromwelUs Letters and Speeches a , 1846 ;
Gooch: History of English Democratic Ideas , Cambridge, 1838; Shaw: History of the
English Church, 1640-1660 , London, igoo; Glass: The Barebones Parliament, 1633 ,
London, i88g; Firth: CromweWs Army , London, 1302; Gardiner: Cromwell, 1833:
all these works are very important, and to a great extent they supersede
Weingarten 9 s classic work Die Revolutionskirchen Englands, 1868. Weingarten has
made too little distinction between the groups within Independency, and he
has altogether misunderstood the distinction between the Baptist movement
and ecclesiastical Protestantism. — Weingarten 9 s excellent account of Cromwell,
however, agrees entirely with the article by Kolde on Cromwell in PR 3 . The story
of the religious development of Cromwell, of his relation to Harrison, of his
adoption of “spiritual” ideas, still needs to be cleared up. “Spiritual” religion
is represented in its extremist form by his two chaplains, Dell and Saltmarsh,
as will be shown later. This also is a point which Weingarten has not noticed,
and which distinguishes Cromwell from the actual Baptist movement. Here
are some “spiritual” expressions: “The true succession is through the Spirit,
given in its measure” (Kolde, IV, 341) ; the formulation of the only sign of a
PROTESTANTISM
929
real Christianity as of those “who believe in the remission of sins through the
blood of Christ, and in free justification through the blood of Christ, who live
upon the grace of God ,, } is Pietistic in its outlook ( Kolde , 342) ; “spiritual” also
are the signs of a true minister required by the Examination Board : “They
must not admit a man unless they were able to discerne something of the
grace of God in him ; grace of God which has to be so inquired for, as not
foolishly or senselessly, but so far as man could judge according to the rules
of charity” (Glass, 133) ; “spiritual” and not Baptist is his whole Church
principle of “comprehension”, which allowed different groups to exist freely
within a Church which merely carried on an external administration: “A
system of*State aid and regulation of parishes leaving to individual churches
a free hand for variety of doctrine and freedom in forms of worship.” — Glass ,
131; Cromwell’s speech, 1657: “I think if there be freedom of judgment it is
here. Here are three sorts of godly men whom you are to take care for, for
whom you have provided in your settlement. And how could you put the
selection upon the Presbyterians without by possibility excluding all those
Anabaptists, all those Independents? As you have put it in this way, that,
though a man be any of those three judgments, if he have the root of the matter
in him he may bp admitted” (Glass, 133). Francis Rous, likewise, the untiring
Convener and worker in all the Ecclesiastical Commissions of the Long Parlia-
ment and of Cromwell, was also full of similar “spiritual” ideas; this is his
declaration quoted by Glass , 48: “From Christ’s time place is approved by
truth and not truth by place. He that freed true worship from being tied to
Jerusalem, and tied it to the service in spirit which may be in all places, gave
true religion a large scope, even as large as the world itself.” Further, Rous,
as is well known, is a mystic whom Ritschl: Gesch. d. Prot., I, 128-130, considers
influenced by “mediaeval example”. “As in the English Church Calvinism
of the Independent type came very near to the Anabaptists, so this work
(by Rous) proves that in that direction they had also drawn upon the in-
dispensable example of mysticism!” Also in the whole view of “Church
comprehension” there are “spiritual” arguments and motives ; cf. Shaw, II, 75,
where this declaration is made to the Scots with reference to Ircton’s report :
“For the toleration of all religions and forms of worship that their letter
objects, wg know not whom they intend in that charge; as for the truth and
power of religion, it being a thing intrinsical between God and the soul, and
the matters of faith and the Gospel being such as no natural light doth reach
unto, we conceive there is no human power of coercion thereunto, nor to
restrain man from believing what God suffers their judgment to be persuaded
of.” There are suggestions of a connection with Schwenkfeld in Sippell: Ch.W,
ign, p. g66, and William Dell's Programm, p. 81, where the reference to Osiander
would have been better if applied to Schwenkfeld. To the extent, as we shall
see later, that Schwenkfeld’s teaching was already a combination of “spiritual”
and Baptist ideas, it naturally contains indirect Baptist influences. — For the
relation of Cromwell to Harrison, see Glass, 61 and 64; Firth, 318, 341 ff., 370 . —
On the Independent army chaplains, Dell, Saltmarsh, Sedgwick, Hugh
Peters, s tt Firth, 320 ff., in Lilburn’s regiment, John Canne; in Cromwell’s
John Owen, Thomas Patient, Robert Stapylton, see Firth, 324 and 323-327,
On John Owen, the friend and confidant of Cromwell, as a Pietist who was
above all sectional interests and respected by all, see Heppe: Gesch. des Pietrsmus,
*879> PP- 43ff-'y Dell and Saltmarsh are “spiritual” idealists; Hugh Peters,
originally a Puritan, developed into a democratic Radical (Gooch, 134-136 and
j 75); Canne, who was first a Baptist preacher, became likewise radically
VOL. II. HH
930 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Anabaptist (Gooch, 174 ff.); John Goodwin was originally an Anglican clergy-
man, but later he developed in the direction of “spiritual” religion (Gooch,
1 3 2 ff .). — Cromwell himself had a strongly Calvinistically conservative strain.
His conception of the Law of Nature was distinctly a class conception : “A
nobleman, a gentleman, a yeoman, the distinction between these is rightly
of great interest to the nation. Was not the natural constitution of the nation
not almost trod underfoot with scorn and contempt by people with levelling
principles?” (Bernstein, 630 ). As from the point of view of doctrine he was a
Calvinist who held predestinarian views, his conception of revolution and of
civil war was first of all that of the Calvinists and Huguenots. But the more,
in the social chaos, things became confused, the more he explained events and
inward resolutions as revelations and guidance from God for the course of
events willed by God. This is fanaticism. He also tended to cherish the expecta-
tion of the speedy return of Christ, and in connection with that he cherished
an indefinite hope of a universal reordering of conditions in the spirit of the
Christian idea. But the maintenance of civic and State order, the rejection of
all pure democracy and Communism, the appeal to the army as “a lawful
power called by God”, the appeal to the salus populi as the rational legal basis
of the State — all these, on the other hand, are Calvinistic characteristics, in
absolute contrast to the Chiliastic idea of reform, a view which he held for a
time, owing to the difficulty of knowing the Will of God, but which he finally
regarded as a point of view which led to the wanton destruction of *11 order.
After the dissolution of the Parliament of the Saints he returned with increasing
decision to the old Calvinistic theory of authority, since he regarded himself
as the legal authority, called to this position by the people in the absence of all
other legal authority. Of Independency he retained nothing beyond liberty of
conscience. Otherwise his policy was such as could only be conceived on the
basis of the Calvinistic relative Natural Law; he was always sure that “the
cause of Christ and the cause of the people agree well together”. Cf. my article
Moralisten, Englische in PRE 3 , XIII, 443-448.
418 (p. 670.) On Locke, see Bastide and Lezius , especially Rothenbiicher, where
the further development of the philosophy of law and of the State is described
(pp. 46-112). At the same time it is characteristic how everywhere the distinction
is made between the theorists who have been more or less determined by
Independent American ideas, and those who defend and exalt the modern
Enlightenment against the Church. R. considers that the latter appear pre-
dominantly in Catholic countries where people are accustomed to a uniform
religion, and where the Catholic unity is only replaced by the Enlightenment.
The latter type is that to which the Deist religion of the State of Rousseau
belongs, alongside of which freedom is given for particular private convictions.
Also from this side Rousseau is anything but an inheritor of Calvinistic or even
neo-Calvinistic ideas ; see also Jellinek: Erkldrung der Menschen- und Burgerreckte *,
1904; also my Trennung von Staat und Kirche , 1303. — On the practical American
form, see also the works named on p. 328, and also Rothenbiicher, 116-170 .
When Hdgermann points to the Law of Nature and to Locke, he does not
realize the idea of the Christian Natural Law which is concealed within this*
theory, nor the way in which Locke is affected by Independency. Natural
Law and Christian arguments are not in opposition as he thinks they are ( p . 151).
Hence Methodism in America has found such a response, and from the social
point of view there is there still to-day a very massive orthodoxy and strict
morality. Usually the European of the Enlightenment never quite understands
this phenomenon.
PROTESTANTISM
93i
414 (p* 67°.) For the fact that the Calvinism of the present day has in some
directions very largely accepted the Free Church principle, see Vinet and
Kuyper , and the great survey of Rothenbiicher of the Free Churches in existence
at the present time. — For the connection between this Church principle and
political democracy, see Rothenbiicher , 472. — The Pilgrim Fathers, even while
they were still on the Mayflower , made a political covenant on the pattern of
the Church Covenant ; see Barrage: Church Covenant , pp. 86 and 93. “By 1639 the
Covenant idea had become so popular in the minds of the Massachusetts and
New Haven colonists that even towns were organized by covenant.” Cf. also
Jellinek: Erklarung,pp. 36-39. The connection between Calvinism and democracy
is almost t&ken for granted in modern Calvinist literature, whether in the form
in which Christianity and the Bible are completely identified with democracy,
or in the theory that Calvinism is the final form of development of Christianity
in which democracy and religion have finally become one, and which, therefore,
is destined to triumph over the world. We find these ideas in Vinet, Kuyper, and
Rauschenbusch. The French emphasize the agreement between Christianity and
democracy ; see the work which has already been mentioned of Mialys ; further,
P. Sabatier: A propos de la separation 2 , 1900, and R. Allier: Une revolution, 1806.
Choisy, who is sudi an excellent Calvin scholar, closes his inaugural lecture at
Geneva entitled L'etat chretien calviniste, 1909, with the words : “To sum up ;
the theocratic regime, which was carried out by the Christian State of Geneva,
was a rude but salutary training in justice, morality, and virile piety for that
epoch. It prepared the way for liberty of conscience in the future and for
the development of the spirit of fraternity and solidarity in the Christian
democracy” (p. 32). On Dissent in England, see von der Goltz: Staat und Kirche
in Grossbritannien, Preuss. Jahrbb., 84, 1896. Originally this union of Calvinism
and democracy was only achieved to a limited extent in England, where the
Independents of the Calvinistic turn of mind, especially Ireton and Cromwell,
as far as possible remained even politically Conservative and legitimists, and it
was only groups like the “Levellers”, which had been influenced by Baptist
ideas, which represented pure democracy; see Rothschild: Der Gedanke einer
geschriebenen Verfassung in der englischen Revolution, 1903 , also Gooch: English
Democratic Ideas. Cromwell, indeed, declared in 1654 ( Carlyle , III, 29): “liberty
of conscience and liberty of the subject — two as glorious things to be contended
for as any God has given us”, but he immediately adds : “yet both these
abused for the patronizing of villainies”. In this, from his relative conservative
standpoint, he rejects radical democracy. His own views on the connection
between the Free Church movement and democracy were peculiarly confused.
— This union of ideas was only clearly perceived, free from all the elements of
early Calvinism, in America ; on this subject, see the great work of Tocqueville:
La democratic en Amirique 8 , 1830. In England it is only the work of the nineteenth
century, where Dissent after the reforms of 1832 became the support of
Liberalism and of democracy, and at the same time permeated these ideas
with religious enthusiasm; see Ostrogorski: La democratic et V organisation des
partis politiques, /, 1903 , pp. 21-26 ; also Held, p. 48.
414a (p. 671.) On the sense of superiority in Calvinism in this respect, see
Kuyper, p. 13: “Lutheranism remained ecclesiastical and theological ; it is only
Calvinism which both inside and outside the Church has left its mark upon all
forms of human life. No one speaks of Lutheranism as the creation of a distinc-
tive way of living ; even the name is scarcely mentioned, whereas all who know
history agree more and more in calling Calvinism the creator of a distinctive
world of human life.” P . 26: “It is as clear as day that the main force in the
932 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
development of the human race after Babylon, Egypt, Greece, and the Roman
Empire, and after the Papal supremacy, has finally come into the hands of the
Calvinistic peoples of Western Europe”; p. 37: “Calvinism means the com-
pleted evolution of Protestantism which in the sixteenth century led the
development of our race into a new and higher phase . . . Therefore everyone
who refuses to start from the standpoint of atheism or anti-theism must go
back to Calvinism in order to learn to think and to live according to the
Calvinistic principle, naturally in our day in a form which corresponds to the
life of our time.” Or cf. Dexter , pp. 594 ff>: “In the Plymouth Colony, and later
in that of Massachusetts, the Free Church system flourished. It had a large
part in shaping the thought and life of the colonists. It tinctured thefr political
idea and aided powerfully in preparing the way for American Independence,
and ever since their day it has continued a potent factor for good in our
national life. In the Mother Country also, although hampered by many
hostile conditions and not wholly free even yet to do its best work, it has
become conspicuous and effective, and during the nineteenth century it has
accomplished much of what it could not bring to pass in the seventeenth. . . .
It would be a mistake to regard the Pilgrim Colony in America ... as merely
ecclesiastical in origin and development ... it was one of the earliest manifesta-
tions of that resistless impulse of expansion and conquest . . . which changed
the whole face of the globe. It opened a fresh and vitally important era in
human history. It was practically the beginning of the civilized permanent
settlement of an almost unknown Continent. It prepared the way for the birth
of a new and mighty nation. The world’s debt to the Pilgrims is not limited
by any denominational lines. It is universal. The adherence of the Free Church
systems may fairly claim to possess special justification for pride in the Pilgrim
history, but nobody can monopolize it. All lovers of intelligence and civil as
well as religious liberty have the right to share it.” This is Americanism in its
relative connection with Calvinism and sectarianism. — From the opposite
point of view Shaw complains in his English Church , /, 316: “The earliest
Reformation had never proclaimed such a separation of the civil from the
ecclesiastical government. It was the fatal and malignant heritage of the
genius and life of Calvin, and how adversely it has affected the later history of
European progress can hardly yet be estimated.” — There are* numerous
excellent observations in Tocqueville's book on the special character of Puritan
Anglo-Saxon democracy contrasted with nationalist French democracy.
In /, 5/ he gives rightly as the guiding principle of the whole the words out
of the old Matthew Magnolia Americana: “Let us not delude ourselves about
that which we call our independence. In reality, there is a kind of corrupted
freedom which is common to men and animals and which consists in doing
whatever one pleases. This kind of freedom is the enemy of all authority,
it endures rules and regulations unwillingly ; in giving way to this we descend
below our own level ; it is the enemy of truth and of peace, and God Himself
has found it necessary to speak out openly against it. But there is a civil and
moral freedom whose strength is in unity, and to protect which is, indeed, the
nature of all power ; this is the freedom to do fearlessly all that is right and good.
This holy freedom in all fateful hours we will defend, and for this, if necessary,
we will sacrifice our lives.” Cf. also the observations in the preceding pages
on the fundamental sociological theory of Calvinism; also Ostrogorski , /, 93:
“From the moment when the individual soul awakened to affirm himself
before God and Society ‘man* had entered into the social and political life of
England, never to leave it. In England he entered by the door of ethics, as he
PROTESTANTISM
S>33
penetrated into France by that of logic.” Cf. also in a similar vein, Morley:
Life of Gladstone , 1 , 163 .
416 (p. 673.) On the history of toleration and the liberty of worship, which
goes far beyond mere tolerance, see the article entitled Tolerant, by Friedberg,
in PRE 8 ; Rothenbiicher, 74 ff., 1 16-131 ; Jellinek : Die Erklarung der Menschen - und
Biirgerrechte 2 , 1304; especially Ruffini: La libertd religiosa , I, Storia della idea, igoo.
For the very limited tolerance of the Brownists, Barrowists, and Pilgrim
Fathers, see the works which have already been mentioned by Burrage, Powicke,
and Dexter', in New England, see Jellinek, pp. 39-43; toleration and the Long
Parliament, Shaw, II, 33-97 ; among the Independents, Jellinek, 36; Shaw, II,
46-32; Goodwin and a memorial by the Brownists shows that they went a
good way in this direction, cf. Glass, p. 21 f (here with the “spiritual” argument,
“Let every spirit praise the Lord”) ; on Cromwell and religious toleration,
see Glass and Kolde; Speech III ( Carlyle , III, 68) deals with the question of the
fundamental laws which every system of legislation must regard as natural
rights. “Again, is not Liberty of conscience a fundamental? . . . Liberty of
conscience is a natural right ; and he that would have it ought to give it. . . .
Liberty of conscience, truly that is a thing which ought to be very reciprocal !
. . . This, I say, is a fundamental. It is for us and the generations to come.”
Otherwise this toleration was very limited, as Glass proves with detailed
illustrations. Milton travelled farthest along this line ; in addition to the usual
Puritan-independent and “spiritual” motives he added the broader element
of rationalism, which, however, remained confined to the idea of the Christian
State. Locke took up the subject at this point. — Complete independence and
freedom were demanded only by the Baptists and the spiritual idealists of the
time. For the former see Tracts on Liberty of Conscience and Persecution, 1614-1661
(a publication of the Hanserd Knollys Society, 1846). Roger Williams, whose
name is held in high honour in America at the present day, was one of the
most important representatives of this spirit ; see The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution
for Cause of Conscience of 1664, published with a biographical introduction by
the same Society, 1848. R. W. was a Puritan of a very devout kind, who laid
great stress on “holiness of life”, and as such he was strongly opposed to any
union of Church and State, a combination which had already taken place in
the Congregationalism of New England ; closely connected with that he was
rigidly democratic and keen on an ethical system of politics, which led him
(like Penn at a later date) to desire to deal with the Indians on a basis of
justice and kindness, and he established missions amongst them; from this
point of view he opposed the Colonial Charters, which made grants of land
belonging to the Indians without any regard for their rights. This fact, together
with protests against the mingling of affairs of Church and State, led to his
being banished from the colony. In Providence he founded a purely democratic
State with entire religious liberty (for the fortunes of this enterprise, see Doyle),
and went over to the Baptists in 1639 (the biography remarks : “Infant Baptism
and persecution, as in other churches, in sisterly embrace together”, XXVI,
and mentions, p. XXXIII, a Baptist asserting as one of the results of Infant
Baptism that “hence also collaterally have been brought the power of the
civil magistrate into the church”, which shows a right sense of the fact that
Infant Baptism implies the Church of the people or the National Church, and
that this means finally the domination of the State in the Church). Roger
Williams did not remain a Baptist for very long, however; he then gave up
belonging to any denomination at all, believing (like Schwenkfeld, Coornheert,
and Franck, as well as the Collegiants) that the true constitution of the Early
934 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Church had long ago disappeared, since the days of the Apostles, in fact, and
that now there was no longer in existence any Church at all which had been
instituted by God. Thus he then adopted a position which was entirely indi-
vidualistic and non-denominational (XXVII). His Bloudy Tenenty 1644, was
linked on to a Baptist treatise in favour of liberty of conscience, which is
defended (XXX). Only in the same year did the Independent, John Goodivin,
come forward. R. W. went too far for the Independents : “They are willing to
grant liberty only to those sound in fundamentals, the identical views of their
brother Congregationalists of America” (XXXV). The feeling of the Bloudy
Tenent is radically individualistic, although the argument as a whole is the
Baptist argument, and only combines with this the specific Puritan c sentiment
of superiority to the world and of possessing a victorious mission to spread the
Truth. “Spiritual” elements are not emphasized particularly, although it
seems probable that the writer was acquainted with and influenced by spiritual
and mystical literature. The following quotation seems to bear this out:
“Whatever worship, ministry, ministration, the best and purest, are practised
without faith and true persuasion that they are the true institution of God,
they are sin, sinful worship, ministers, etc. . . . Without search and trial no
man attains this faith and right persuasion. . . . Having tried we must hold
fast upon the loss of a crown” (p. 8). His “inwardness” often reminds us of
Luther’s earlier period ( p . 118): “I hence observe, that here being in this
Scripture (2 Cor. x. 4) held forth a twofold state, a civil state and a spiritual,
civil officers and spiritual, civil weapons and spiritual weapons, civil vengeance
and punishment and a spiritual vengeance and punishment. . . . These states
being of different natures and considerations, as far differing as spirit from
flesh, I first observe that civil weapons are most improper and unfitting in
matters of the spiritual state and kingdom, though in the civil state most
proper and suitable.” His exegesis is often explicitly mystical and idealistic in
the extreme. See his appeal to the “famous Waldensian witnesses” (p. 155),
to Luther (p. 171), against Galvin, appeal to Gal. i. 8 (p. 181). It is worthy of
note that the Baptist treatise upon which this work is based itself appeals in
detail to Luther’s earlier “spiritual” conception of the Church (pp. 75 ff.).
Roger Williams himself bases his individualism upon the doctrine of pre-
destination (p. 82): “The Church or spiritual state, city or kingdom, has laws,
orders, and armories ... to defend itself against the very gates 6f earth or
hell. . . . The Lord Himself knows who are His and His foundation remaineth
sure; His elect or chosen cannot perish or be finally deceived.” We shall come
upon similar references to the earlier period of Luther and his “spiritual”
ideas among the English mystics of the Cromwell period. A monograph on
Roger Williams would be very interesting; in many respects he is very
original. — Kuyper — although in a somewhat sophistical way — illustrates the
adoption of liberty of conscience as one of the principles of Neo-Calvinism.
He asserts (quite against the spirit of Calvin) that the “government of the
Church on earth is democratic to the very marrow” (p. 5 6 ), and, moreover, he
describes liberty of worship and religious toleration as an “essential” feature of
Calvinism (p. 92). In so doing, however, Kuyper approaches very closely to
that idea which is inevitably connected with the whole idea of toleration,
namely, that all religious knowledge is merely relative, and with this he is
renouncing an original principle of Calvinism. “By its strong emphasis upon
religious freedom Calvinism abandoned the idea of the unity of the visible
Church” (p. 94). “Since the very fact of the destruction of the unity of the
Church naturally meant that the relative nature of all creeds must come into
PROTESTANTISM
935
prominence, Calvinism, by making possible the formation of various churches
of different kinds, also brought to light the limited nature of our belief in the
Truth !” In ecclesiastical matters the State has no right to interfere, “not from
a false idea of neutrality, nor from any idea of indifference to the truth, but
because as the ruling authority it lacks the presuppositions which would enable
it to give a true judgment, and the attempt to do this would too easily override
the sovereignty of the Church” ( p . 97). Hence the State must not attempt to
hinder a Church from setting up a system of the strictest orthodoxy within
itself, but every Church must also tolerate the existence of other churches
alongside of itself, and must not call upon the State to put an end to their
existencet “Nothing can destroy the fundamental rule, that the civil govern-
ment ought to honour the whole body of Christian churches as the many-sided
revelation of the Church of Christ upon earth” (p. g8). “The State ought to
recognize that every citizen ought to be granted full liberty of conscience as an
original human right, belonging to him by nature” (p. 99). This is precisely
the spirit of the constitution of New Hampshire, quoted by Jellinek , p. 21.
Certainly the only element in it which is Calvinistic is the assertion of the
sovereignty of the Church over against the State. The relative element in these
statements is du«*to the influence of the Baptists, of mysticism and of rationalism ;
Kuyper himself is unable to deny that “frequently ( !) it was the Baptists and
the Remonstrants who even three hundred years ago defended the system of
the Fret Church against Calvinism” (p. 92). Real toleration is found only
among mystics and spiritual idealists and reformers, but among them this
very easily merges into rationalism. The Baptist movement, with its absolute
conception of Truth, is ultimately only tolerant to the extent of desiring to be
independent of the State, and only from that standpoint does it advance to the
inevitable conclusion that liberty of worship is also desirable. All these influences
are fused in Neo-Calvinism. For the secular reasons for toleration which also
existed, see Max Weber: Archiv XXI , 42 f. — The view upheld by Jellinek of the
significance of this formulation and of the practical carrying out of liberty of
conscience for the legal formulation of a still more comprehensive list of
natural human rights, and therewith of the introduction of the conception into
the constitution of the modern state in general, has been very largely questioned
or deprecated. The second edition of his book takes some of these objections
into consideration. The Catholic Paulus ( Kolnische Volkszeitung, Literarische
Beilage , igo6, Nr. gg) argues that the rights of humanity arc exclusively derived
from the Natural Law theory of the State and the philosophy of the Enlighten-
ment ; Wahl: Z ur Geschichte der Menschenrechte ( H . Z-> 103, pp. yg-Sg), emphasizes,
alongside of the religious influences, the general political situation of the states
which were united together with their entirely different church organizations,
and the influence of the ideas of the Enlightenment. That is probably right.
Hdgermann: Die Erklarungen der Menschen- und Biirgerrechte , igio ( Eberings Hist.
Studd., 78 ), likewise lays stress on the literary influences of the Enlightenment
and reduces the religious influences to a minimum, but his ideas about the
latter are very confused. He has misunderstood Roger Williams and his
opinions altogether, he does not know that a conception of Christian Natural
Law exists, and the influence of Milton and Locke, which he rightly emphasizes,
is not interpreted in connection with its religious basis. Much in the book is,
however, instructive and interesting ; he is right in pointing out that equality
is a purely rationalistic growth, and his emphasis upon economic, political,
and personal influences is thoroughly justifiable. Jellinek never argued that the
American revolution was due to Puritanism, but it was only the rights of
936 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
humanity and the argument for these which sprang out of Puritanism. In my
opinion this is still true, even though he treats the Enlightenment too sum-
marily. For all students of the religious development the explanations (text in
Jellinek) contain the specifically religious sense of the invulnerability of con-
scientious convictions and of the religious element which ought not to be
touched by the State at all ; this shows the Calvinistic-Baptist origin of this
development of the idea. — For a more recent work see Klovecorn: Die Entstehung
der Erkldrung der Mcnschen - und Burgerrechte , igu.
416 (p. 674.) That the classic Law of Nature is the emancipation of the Stoic
elements from their connection with the ecclesiastical dogma and ethics, and
from the ecclesiastical myth of primeval history, appears in all ther mass of
average literature dealing with the Law of Nature, as described by Glafey:
Gesch . des Rechts der Vernunft , iygg (see especially p. 54; Illy ig3f), and
Hinrichs : Gesch. der Rechts- und Staatsprinzipien, 1848-52 (especially /, 227; II, 13).
Aristotle, whose organic theory of the formation of the State was coupled
together in the very mixed ecclesiastical theory of the Law of Nature with the
contract theory and with the doctrine of the Divine origin of government,
is entirely set aside ; increased individualism now works solely with the Stoic
doctrines of an original freedom — (whether actual or only virtually present) —
equality, and goodness of men in the Golden Age, out of which there arose,
through the egoism of men and their non-social qualities, the necessity for the
development of Society in the form of the State, in order to protect the original
goods granted by Nature. In so doing, however, the ideas of Stoicism are not
only released, but they also lose their Christian aspect, since (a) the Law of
Nature is derived purely out of the nature of humanity, that is, out of the
social and reasonable character of mankind, without any admixture of the
Law of Nature with the desire to imitate the justice of God, and without any
sense of need for the direct connection with the conception of God at all;
(b) since in the definition of the Law of Nature the difference between the
Primitive State and the fallen State increasingly disappears, and the Law of
Nature is interpreted as originating in humanity as it is in itself; (c) since the
rise of the State and of Law does not appear as a merely relative Natural Law
of the fallen state, but as progress in civilization for the preservation of the
natural disposition against passions which would endanger its existence.
Henceforward the views of men become independent of primaeval history and
its desirable social organization, and develop into purely rational sciences,
which allow scope for the Church and for revelation alongside of themselves,
but which are really independent in principle. Cf. my article Das stoisch-
christliche Naturrecht und das moderne profane Naturrecht , //.£., igu, also Ver-
handlungen des I. deutschen Soziologentages , igu. When Gothein and Kantorowicz
here point out the importance of Roman Law in this process of transition,
I would like to observe that already in the confessional philosophy of law
Roman Law was the ratio scripta and the historical-positive development of the
Law of Nature, identical with the Decalogue in its spirit and its meaning.
This process is quite evident in the development of Hugo Grotius, who belongs
from the very outset to a circle which was inwardly not Calvinistic ; he was
also very much under the influence of Stoicism, and in his view there is a
curious blend of utilitarian and idealistic elements ; Grotius evolved his ethical
theory, his theory of the philosophy of history, and his theory of law quite
independently of all confessions ; cf. the Heidelberg Dissertation by W. Geibel
on Ethik und Theologie des H.G . For further details on this subject see Gierke:
Althunus *, and Figgis: From Gerson to Grotius ; on the whole subject, see Bluntschli:
PROTESTANTISM
937
Gesch, des allgemeinen Staatsrechtes und der Politik , 1864 , and Bergbohm: Jurisprudent
und Rechtsphilosophie , 1892 ; it is, indeed, hard to say how, once the ecclesiastical
doctrine of Society had been destroyed, the modern doctrine of Society could
or should have been established in any other way.
4l4a (p. 675.) In the Bloudy Tenent of Roger Williams there is one of the most
important ideas for the possibility of the building up of Society and of the
State according to the Law of Nature and the Second Table (of the Decalogue),
without the interference of the State with the sovereign rights of the purely
spiritual Church, but also without the need to create a Christian support for
bourgeois morality and expediency. Even Heathen, Jews, and Turks are
capable of a far-reaching politico-civil ethic, which in actual fact will always
fit in to the Christian ethic, since indeed the Law of Nature is only the Second
Table of the Decalogue. Roger Williams also combines with this idea a purely
external utilitarian conception of the State ; for the same reasons this is also the
case in Locke (see the book about him which has already been mentioned by
Bastide ). When the religious duties and ideals are taken away from the
ecclesiastical conception of the State it then falls a prey altogether to utili-
tarianism. On Bayle , see Jodi: Gesch. d. Ethiky 7 2 , 420 ; on Milton, Stern: Milton
und seine Zeit, 1^77-99, The unbroken process of development from the
ccclesiastical-Calvinist Natural Law into a purely rational conception of
Natural Law is seen in the New Englanders described by Hagermanny especially
in Otisy whom he describes as the real father of the American system (pp. 44-98).
Those who are familiar with the Calvinist doctrine of the State will here be
able to note everywhere both the Calvinistic root, and the development in the
direction of a rationalistic Natural Law. Hdgermann quotes on p. 92: “He who
desires to realize the doctrine of unlimited passive obedience, which allows no
resistance to man at all, is not only a Nero or a rogue, but he is also a rebel
against the sanity of human intelligence as well as against the laws of God,
of Nature, and of his country. 55 With that he couples freedom of conscience
and the rejection of the priestly and the military caste, as, with an appeal
to Saul, Roger Williams had also taught (p. 99). In Boston, therefore, he
was compared with Isaiah and Ezekiel (p. 47). This is still clearly the atmo-
sphere of Calvinism. Hdgermann gives several other examples of this process of
development.
417 (P- 6 ^ 5 -) Cf. on this question the often-quoted article by Max Weber:
Kirchen und Sekten in Nordamerikay and Antikritisches , p . 202; Tocqueville: Dimocratie
en Amtrique; von Schulze-Gdvernitz: Deutscher Imperialisms und englischer Freihandely
pp. 42-64; Hartmann : Englische Frommigkeit. It is very interesting to note
(Rothenbiicher, 149-169) how American law, from the point of view of the idea
of associations, tries to do justice, by means of suitable fictions, to the idea of
the Church as an institution. Here two different worlds of sociological thought
come into collision. This contact is well illustrated by a passage in the account
of Locke’s argument against patriarchalism and against the institutional idea
in Bluntschliy p. 173: “The (opposing) argument is this : the children are bound
by their fathers, and this argument is false. The father has no right to give away
the freedom of his son. When the son reaches man’s estate he is no less free than
his father was. Since the states are in existence, and children are born into them
and educated as dependent members of the families which make up the State,
since the land and the possessions of the citizens are permanently controlled,
since in these conditions it is only one at a time, and one after another that
individuals attain their majority and become free, and not a whole number at
once, the act of freedom which the man who has come of age has consummated
93® THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
when he unites his life to that of the State is overlooked. He is free, if he will,
to choose to belong to another State. ,, In reality, this is the pivot of the whole
question, and it is evident that there is here a very close resemblance to the
ideal of the sect, which essentially claims that no human being is born into an
institution, but that it is his duty to enter into a voluntary congregation on
reaching maturity and of his own free will ; this implies that Adult Baptism
and not Infant Baptism should be the rule. — At the same time we must
remember, on the other hand, that Gierke , in his Genossenschaftsrecht , derives the
mediaeval conception of the corporation, of the institution, of the unity of the
State, from the analogy of the ecclesiastical Corpus mysticum.
418 (p. 676.) Here the Life of Gladstone , by Morley , is very instructive (1903).
Gladstone developed from Anglican Conservatism into a combination of
Calvinism and Liberalism which had a great influence upon the inner life of
the English nation, and which has found its chief support among English
Nonconformists. His Conservative successor, Lord Salisbury, called Gladstone
“the great Christian ,, J and the biographer adds : “nothing could be more true,
or better worth saying. He not only accepted the doctrines of that faith as he
believed them to be held by his own communion ; he sedulously strove to apply
the noblest moralities of it to the affairs both of his own n?tion and of the
commonwealth of nations” ( 7 , 4). For that very reason, at least to some extent,
he even envisaged the possibility of Disestablishment. He separated the spheres
of Natural Law and the churches, reserving the former to the State and the
latter to Revelation and its various interpretations ; cf. a characteristic state-
ment of Gladstone’s on “the highest ground of natural justice” ; it is “that
justice which binds man to man ; which is older than Christianity, because it
was in the world before Christianity was born ; which is broader than Christ-
ianity, because it extends to the world beyond Christianity ; and which underlies
Christianity, for Christianity itself appeals to it” (/, 363 ) ; this is to him, for
example, the rule for the war with China. Erich Marcks certainly remarks on
this point, that this Christian-ethical policy was only possible because Glad-
stone’s predecessors had already established the supremacy of England both
on sea and land so that it could not be questioned, thus giving Gladstone the
luxury of carrying on a moral policy, while at the same time he was fortunate
in having Disraeli as the representative of the opposite policy ; cf. Afarcks : Die
Einheitlichkeit der englischen Auslandspolitik , 1910. To-day we are again experienc-
ing the same ethical Liberal tendency in the internal politics of England. The
visits of English clergy to Germany in the interests of Peace are part of this
movement. The following incident, which I read in a Church paper, is charac-
teristic: a German “General Superintendent” writes with great astonishment
to tell how his very devout host entertained him with true Christian hospitality,
and then told him, perfectly naturally, that in the same guest-room which
his friend was occupying, the radical Liberal Theodor Barth had also stayed.
This certainly is not possible within Lutheranism, and this impossibility is
one of the most difficult problems in the religious situation in Germany. —
Further, we must not overlook the fact that English Liberalism has also a
decided anti-religious, purely utilitarian tendency of the school of Bentham
and Mill. — Kuyper here is typical, speaking of Gladstone as a “Christian
statesman who was a Calvinist to the very marrow” (p, 195). He speaks of
“a sacred spirit of democracy” ( p . 21). “In Calvinism we first see the people
itself come to the fore, and out of its own spontaneous impulse attain a higher
form of social life” (p. 31 ). Here there rules the “universal grace”, the “order of
creation”, or the Lex Naturae, “In the world we have to honour the effect of the
PROTESTANTISM
939
universal grace of God, and for this reason we must free the world from
ecclesiastical bonds . . (p. 24 ). “All that proceeds directly from the Creation
possesses all the presuppositions for an independent (i.e. free from the Church)
development in Nature as such. . . . It is altogether the life of creation according
to the ordinances of creation, and, indeed, in organic development” ( p . 84 ).
“Thus the Church retired to a position, where she was nothing more and
nothing other than the community of the faithful, and thus the life of the
world was set free, not from God, but from the Church. . . . Thus family life
once again became independent. Trade and industry were now free to act on
their own initiative; art and science were released from their ecclesiastical
bonds anjl their own inspiration was given back to them, and the subordination
of the whole of Nature to man, corresponding to the order of creation given by
God in Paradise, was seen to be the true order’* (p. 23). “Fundamental legal
rights” (p. go). “In the Declaration of Independence John Hancock expresses
this in other words when he says that America, in virtue of ‘the Law of Nature
and of Nature’s God* had come into being, that this nation acted as ‘endowed
by the Creator with certain inalienable rights’ . . . that this Declaration was
made with ‘a firm reliance upon the protection of Divine Providence’ ” ( p . 79).
This conception of Natural Law is purely utilitarian : “The well-being of man
must be the visible sign of His Divine Wisdom” (p. 74). This, however, is an
American form of Neo-Calvinism : “Calvinism was transferred to America
that it might develop there in a higher freedom” (p. 30). Here is the summary
of this Neo-Calvinism ( p.33 ). “Remember how first the song of freedom arose
through Calvinism, that consciences which had been oppressed now burst
forth into praise, that our constitutional civil rights were only won and secured
by means of Calvinism, and that at the same time that mighty movement
went forth from Western Europe which permitted art and science to flourish,
opened new roads for trade and industry, renewed family and social life in a
brilliant manner, elevated the status of citizenship, placed the workman on a
level with his master, brought with it a rich development of philanthropy,
and, beyond all this, through its Puritan earnestness, it has exalted, purified,
and ennobled the moral life of mankind” (p. 33). For Kuyper the State is still
an institution of the Natural Law of the fallen State, a “mechanical” system of
authority, placed over the world of Natural Law for the repression of evil, but
for that vfcry reason to be kept carefully within certain limits, in order that it
may not interfere with human rights (p. 86). In spite of all these democratic-
liberal, Free Church toleration, utilitarian-Natural-Law principles, Kuyper is
still the leader of orthodoxy, and of the forces of reaction which are combined
with the Catholic Party, just as American and English Calvinists as a rule are
very orthodox and keep the churches within strict limits. Opposition to the
French conception of the equality of Natural Law (pp. 1J3 ff .). — All this agrees
with the statements in the American Declaration of Independence ( Jellinek ,
p . g): “We hold the following truths as self-evident, namely, that all men are
born equal, that they have been endowed by their Creator with certain
inalienable rights, that to these rights belong life, freedom, and the endeavour
to attain happiness, that, in order to secure these rights, systems of government
have been set up amongst men, which derive the just authority from the consent
of the governed ; that whenever a form of government works against these aims,
it is the right of the people to alter it or to do away with it, to appoint a new
government, and to establish it upon these principles, and to order its powers
as may be best for its happiness and usefulness in the world.” — How utterly
different is the conception of the State in Germany (under the influence of
940 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Lutheranism), and how this conception of a Kulturstaat still means for
many people the absorption of the religious aims of life into the tasks of the
State, appears especially in the attempts to interpret the separation of Church
and State in a German way in Otto Mayer: Staat und Kirche in PRE 3 , and
E. Forster: Entwurf eines Gesetzes betr . die Religionsfreiheit , 1911, especially pp. 39
and 47, with references to Freiherrn, v. Stein and Hegel ; here it is argued that
it is in the interest of the State to use the means it has at its disposal of the
external care of the churches to support the unity and continuance of the chief
great religions, because its nature is not regarded as purely rational and
utilitarian. The same point of view in Max Lenz: Nationalitat und Religion .
Preuss. Jahrbb.y 1907 , here also upon a foundation of Lutheran sentiment.
419 (p. 676.) See, for example, Kuyper y p . 184: “Calvinism is the high-water-
mark of progress; ‘Modernism* does not mean progress since it has no new
ideas of its own. — The material progress of this century (nineteenth) has
nothing to do with progress in the sphere of principle.” Thus Pietism also has
been able to combine technical knowledge and the study of natural science in
a quite neutral way with dogmatic orthodoxy. It is thus expressed by Kuyper:
“Our Calvinistic denomination speaks of two ways through which we come
to the knowledge of God, Nature and the Scriptures, and it i,s far more note-
worthy that Calvin, instead of treating Nature with neglect, said that the
Scriptures were like a pair of spectacles which gave us the power of reading the
Divine Scripture in Creation which had been faint and defective before” {p. 113).
“Thus the Calvinist was still a pilgrim, but a pilgrim who on the way to the
eternal fatherland had a vast task to fulfil. Above, below, and around there
stretched the world with all the wealth of Nature. This whole vast field must
be cultivated. The earth, with all that is in it, was to be made subordinate to
man. Thus there flourished in my present fatherland as never before industry
and agriculture, trade and seafaring. The new life of the community awakened
new needs. In order to be able to control the earth it was necessary to know
the nature of the earth, of the seas, of the qualities and laws which govern
Nature” (p. 122 ). It is along this line that we must interpret the orthodoxy of
so many great English natural scientists. Also the entirely different attitude
to missions among these peoples must also be explained from this point of
view; it is not merely due to its desire for colonies and its gift for colonial
expansion, although naturally these interests probably played some part.
Everywhere it is the possibility of “making the best of both worlds’* (Dowden,
p- ‘ 75 )■
420 (p. 677.) See Powicke , where much emphasis is laid on the presence of
the “spiritual” element in early Congregationalism (/>. 218): “A result of his
two first principles working in combination : his faith in the Inner Light and
his reverence for the written Word. For faith in the Inner Light, at least,
in the case of the more deeply thoughtful and devout of its disciples, really
meant faith in the highest intentions of spiritual reason; and this, when
brought to a study of the written Word, could not fail to operate selectively,
fastening on what was agreeable to the most worthy conception of God
and man and tacitly ignoring all else.” Thus also one section else branched off
into Unitarianism.
422 (p. 678.) On this point sec Gobel: Christl. Leben , 7 , 318-331 . Here already
we meet the democratic tendency in congregational organization, and the
strict separation from the world, also the “prophesyings”. Heppe {p. 20) thus
describes the Puritan “prophesyings”: “The ruling idea was this — that
Christianity was of necessity life, and, indeed, that it ought to be a serious life,
PROTESTANTISM
94 1
entirely regulated by the Word of God, in which the Christian must not be
idle, but in which he must unceasingly exercise himself, proving himself by the
Word of God, and striving for an ever more complete sanctification through
prolonged prayer, through meditation and fasting, and, above all, through
systematic asceticism.” Note the element of asceticism.
428 (p. 678.) For the name and its history, see Douglas Campbell: The Puritan
in Holland , England , and America 4 , 1902, I, p. XXVII; Kattenbusch , article Puritaner
in PRE 3 t who here absolutely identifies Puritanism with Pietism ; Heppe: Gesch .
des Piet., p. 6. The names praxis pietatis and others are also frequently found in
the English literature of the subject (Heppe, pp. 23 , 30). The terms “Precisians”,
“Puritans”, or even “Martinists” were used even by Barrow; the latter term
comes from the Marprelate Tracts ; see Powicke , p. 149. Another term which
occurs again and again is that of “godliness” or “saintliness”, the “godly
men” or the “saints”. Weingarten , unfortunately, did not perceive or describe
this tendency, as Heppe, p. 14, rightly points out: this is why he has not
made clear its relation to Presbyterianism, Congregationalism, and the
Baptist movement ; yet only when these distinctions have been drawn is it
possible to understand the collective expression “Independency”. — Their
opponents still Uked to call them “Libertines”, following the ancient custom
of Geneva.
424 (p. 681.) The most important sources, Works of the English Puritan Divines,
London,* 1843-48, 10 vols., used very largely by Heppe and Max Weber . Also
Heppe: Gesch. d. Pietismus, in which, however, the position from the standpoint
of the history of dogma of early Calvinism and of Lutheran Pietism is not
made clear in any way, and there is no reference to the general history of
civilization in which this movement was set. Ritschl: Gesch. des Pietismus, entirely
ignores this Pietist movement ; the accidental fact that Ritschl did not know
English gave to his views and to those of his followers a very considerable and
a very unfortunate twist. Douglas Campbell has a great deal of information,
but the book needs to be used with caution ; in his mind Puritanism is mainly
Calvinism of the individualistic rigoristic type, and he regards this type of
Puritanism as the origin, to a very large extent, of almost the whole of the
present Anglo-Saxon world ; thus his view of the basis of modern civilization is
similar tc^that oIKuyper, only without his orthodox colouring ; he also includes
the sects within Puritanism. This work, which is in two volumes, reached a
fourth edition, a clear sign of the response which there is to such views. For
Pietistic Puritanism as a special group, distinct from Presbyterianism and
Congregationalism, see also Shaw: English Church, I, 6 f, 51-53 ; for a description
of the Puritanism of the later years of the reign of Elizabeth and of the Stuart
period, contrasted with the Puritanism of earlier days, which was supported
rather by theologians and affected very largely by the anti-Catholicism of
Geneva, see Glass, 4-13 ; this later Puritanism he calls “revivalism”, and says
it may be compared with the Methodism of a later period. See also Dexter:
The England and Holland of the Pilgrims, pp. 122 ff.; it is a “reformation within
the Reformation”, an “evangelical purpose”. Max Weber also describes this
form of Puritanism in its fusion with the sects, and also rightly distinguishes it
from the primitive Calvinism of Geneva. — The question of the reasons for the
rise of this Pietist movement, which was behind the Great Rebellion and was
one of the formative elements in more recent English history, is raised by
Douglas Campbell , 7 , X; he attributes it to the influence of the Calvinistic
exiles from the Netherlands, who came over in great numbers (75,000 fathers
of families), and who were welcomed by Elizabeth on account of their
94a THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
usefulness in trade and industries. “ ‘These Netherlander helped to make
England Protestant, and this laid a lasting basis for her wealth ; but, at the
same time, they did an even greater work than this ; for in helping to make
her Protestant they also helped to make her free”. . . . “It was Protestant
England that ultimately controlled the ocean and the markets of the world,
colonized America, and girded the earth with an empire” ( p . 429). — For the
aspect of the movement which affects the history of civilization, see Taine:
Hist . de la literature anglaise , II, 1863 , pp. 273-433, and, above all, Dowden:
Puritan and Anglican, London, 1900 . Both these writers describe the Puritan
hostility to the world and their systematic asceticism, which, however, does not
mean withdrawal from the world but the active domination of the Me of the
world ; in Dowden there is a very fine description of the secularization of the
Puritan spirit in the comparison between Bunyan and Defoe ( 274-278 ) ; here
he says of the secularized Puritan : “To make the best of both worlds was the
part of prudence, and of the two worlds, that on which our feet are planted is,
at least, nearer and the more submissive to our control. Divine Providence is
doubtless to be acknowledged, but it is highly desirable to supplement Divine
Providence by self-help. . . . Adventurer, trader, colonist, missionary, we hail
him as one of our makers of empire.” For the ethical hostility and the opposition
to the Elizabethan literature, see Douglas Campbell, II, 114-136. There was
good reason for the hostility and the literary class was very meagre. Here also
is the explanation of the austerity of the Puritans, so different from the attitude
of Calvin ; it was due namely to their hostility to the worldliness, immorality,
and brutality of the rest of the nation (pp. 132-163), here, however, the Cal-
vinistic element is greatly underestimated ; social and political reform efforts
(pp. 171-176) ; see also Glass for an estimate of the value of the legislation of the
Barebones Parliament, in which the minority consisted of Pietists of this kind ;
here Pietists opposed Baptist fanatics.
425 (p. 682.) For the class relationships see suggestions in Glass, pp. 6 and 23/.,
Dowden, p. 233 especially Glass, p. 32: “Puritanism was a movement of the
people, with not a few leaders among the aristocracy. For a time its temper
was high and courageous, hopeful and even audacious in new experiments.
Its religious spirit tended to abolish or modify social distinctions : all mortal
men were alike sinners before God, and peer or peasant, if true members of
the congregation, were equally saints. Its favoured ecclesiastical schemes and
platforms were of a democratic kind. Its political ideal was not a loose and
incoherent democracy ; it aimed at vigour in government, and was willing to
confer immense powers upon chosen individuals ; but its political culmination
was a Republic.” P. 4: “The mundane spirit of the Renaissance (?) in its
lower form of commercial interests by degrees allied itself with Puritanism.”
Later (p. 273): “The middle classes advanced in wealth, power, and in influence.
After the jagged precipices and forlorn valleys — scenes of spiritual exaltation
or despair — a tableland was reached — safe, if unheroic — where man might
plough and build.” Douglas Campbell has investigated the problem with
vigour, but he solves it too externally with his favourite theory of the influence
of the Dutch immigrants ; he describes the facts of the situation, however, in
the following terms : this movement was the rise of the middle classes through
the religious movement to a position of importance which they had never held
before, which had permanent results in its effect upon the rise of England and
America to a power over the rest of the world, after Elizabethan England had
been behind the rest of Europe, owing to its defective adoption of the culture
of the Renaissance; pp. 483 /., 490-492 : “No people on earth have a higher
PROTESTANTISM
943
order of virtue than the English middle classes. They bear a courage which
never falters, an earnestness of purpose which brooks no obstacles, a love of
justice and fair play, a devotion to home and country, and an instinctive
morality and real belief in a Higher Power which are not so common among
the Latin races. . . . Their daily life was a sermon on the Christian virtues of
industry, temperance, and charity”; 496: “The opposition to the arbitrary
power of the Crown grew with the development of the industrial classes. The
tiller of the soil, as Irish history has shown, can exist even when denied almost
every human right. But manufactures and commerce require the air of free-
dom. . . . The wealth came, but with it the ideas and spirit that in the next
century (jmder Cromwell) bred a revolution.” The Dissenting middle classes
were shut out from official positions, and, therefore — like the Jews — they
turned to business, to a capitalistic form of agriculture, to manufacturing, and
to trade, this tendency being further strengthened by the Huguenots (II, 401),
their importance for the Liberalism of the nineteenth century (II, 404): “They
forced the passage of the Reform Bill, widening the suffrage. Then they began
to look round for social, legal, and other political reforms.” They now began
to follow Puritan America : “Rejuvenated England has followed America in
her system of popular education, freedom of religion, freedom of the Press,
the secret ballot, prison reform, and the entire reformation of her legal system.”
The origin of the secret ballot from the Dutch system of election within the
Church, see II, 437. In spite of his insistence on the fact that all these things
were due to the influence of Puritanism, Campbell does not throw much light
upon the inner psychological connection. The ascription of these effects to
“Puritanism” in Holland renders it particularly necessary to explain the latter ;
C., however, takes this for granted. Further, the influence of Puritanism in
England and in the Netherlands was a mutual one. There are similar descrip-
tions of the English middle classes in Held, p. 48. Weber, in the articles which
have often been mentioned, deals with the psychological analysis of this whole
subject in a very fine and illuminating manner ; he takes points which have
merely been touched upon or suggested by these other authors and expands
them along this line. For the transmission of this spirit to New England and
through the Dutch to New York, see Campbell, II, and Doyle : The English in
America.
424 (p. 385.) Cf. Gobel, I; Heppe; Ritschl, I; Knappert: Geschiedenis der neder-
landsche hervormde Kerk gedurende de i6e en ije Euw, Amsterdam, 1911 ; for the
constitution see von Hoffmann: Das Kirchenverfassungsrecht der niederland. Kirche
bis 1618. For present conditions, see Rothenbiicher , 423-429. Heppe and Ritschl
take almost no notice at all of the aspect of the question which concerns the
history of civilization. The connection with England is brought out by Heppe ,
xoy-rio , j 40-1 44, 148, 136, 164, 183. Ritschl scarcely touches this point, but, on
the other hand, he analyses the contrast with primitive Calvinism, the con-
nection with the fundamental impulse of Calvinism, the development of this
Pietism out of a mere effort to provide more adequate means of grace and more
pastoral care in order to build up believers in the life of sanctification, into a
legalistic individualism, into a mysticism of the St. Bernard type, into evangelical
emotionalism. He regards this as the destruction of ecclesiastical Calvinism by
the spirit of the Anabaptists and of Catholic mysticism. He does not see,
however, that in reality this represents the exaggerated endeavour of a whole
people striving after holiness, and the natural result of the failure of rigorism
in this task — thus a result of the Calvinistic principle itself— -because his idea
of the normal Christian life is summed up in the certainty of salvation, trust
944 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
in God, and loyalty to the duties of one’s calling ; this produces an ecclesiastical
popular morality, from which, he says, Calvinism, through Pietism, has
departed. — His endeavours to trace resemblances to Liberalism within
Pietism are interesting ( p . 267): “The student of history may assert, that . . .
the expectation of inner and outer changes in the Church and in the world
has hindered the Protestant Church no less than the well-meaning hopes of
the political Enlightenment and of doctrinaire Liberalism endangered the
health of the moral life of the people. Religion of the Pietist type is, at this
point, assigned a close relationship with political Liberalism, whereas this
school of thought considers itself to be exactly opposed to it. This, however, is
due to the fact that originally Pietism did not trouble at all about the State
as such, but that its endeavours which resemble Liberalism were all under-
taken within the sphere of the Church. The adherents of the Enlightenment
and of political Liberalism, however, know that Pietism prepared the way for
their movements.” Their ascetic and revivalist character is emphasized by
Knappert , p. 273. — For their connection with the history of civilization in
general see Laspeyres; Douglas Campbell , II, 287-336; Busken-Huet: Het Land van
Rembrandt 2 , 1886. We must not overlook the fact that the Arminians, like the
Anglicans, are defenders of the State Church or “Erastianj,”, and that also
for this very reason the theology of the Stuart period was Arminian, or at least
it was called so. See also Campbell , 304 , for the views of Oldenbarneveld on
certain Calvinists whom he called “Puritans and double Puritans”. Here the
difficulty is not merely opposition to the doctrine of predestination. It is plain
from the complaints of the Pietist section that their opposition was directed
further against the worldliness of a politically, economically, and scientifically
progressive nation which disapproves of asceticism. Above all, they strove
against the exemption of certain practical callings from religious rules, and
against the restriction of the latter merely to private and personal life. Often
they almost hover on the brink of formulating the idea of an “intramundane
asceticism”. Cf. Ritschl , I, 123: “Voet accepts as the definition of mysticism
the phrase of Gerson: Vita contemplativa est status hominum extra mundum. . . .
Voet (who himself to a great extent accepted the mystical and ascetic
literature of Catholicism ( Heppe , 131) ) discerned in this tendency the founda-
tion of monasticism . . . and replies : unde ipsos videre est separare invicem primae
tabulae praecepta a praeceptis secundae tabulae .” P. 274: “It is, however, appro-
priate that if contemplation whose home is the cloister is to be carried
out, the rule of the canonical hours must be rediscovered (i.e. the Puritan
form of discipline and ordering of time, even to the extent of determining the
length of time which may be spent in sleep). But this can only be permitted
within civic activity, which is just as legitimate in the Calvinistic Church as it
is customary among the Dutch people.” P. 278: “Here we meet the ideas of
self-examination and penitence, of self-denial and scrupulous behaviour, of
the spiritual permeation of secular business and of the desire for perfection,
and finally of public and private worship.” Busken-Huet , II, 84 (alluding to a
book on the theologian Bogermann) gives an account of the ascetic require-
ments, and then adds : “Hunne levensbeschouwing was somber en stemmig als
hun kleed. Zy geleken monniken, die hunne cel verlaten hadden, en het boze
menschdom wilden overreden om, boete doende, de wereld voor zich tot een
kloster te maken.” This was everywhere the same as that word of Sebastian
Franck, which I quoted earlier in this book ( Kultur d. G., N.S., 443) : “Detach-
ment from the world and self-denial is the duty of all Christians ; it is no use
trying to throw the responsibility on to monasticism.” Rachfahl calls all this
PROTESTANTISM
945
only “common Christian morality”. Unfortunately, Knodt , p. 26, also takes
the same point of view.
427 (p. 686 .) A tendency to appeal to the lower classes among the people is
asserted by Heppe , p . 51 ; Knappert {172) speaks of democratic tendencies in
the Puritan preachers, which are in accord with their middle-class origin;
the same is emphasized in the Dissertation by Geibel , which has already been
mentioned, where it is asserted that wholesale business was (on the whole)
carried on by the “Libertines” and trade by the Puritans or “Precisians”;
see also Laspeyres, Busken-Huet, and Douglas Campbell . — An interesting illustra-
tion is given by Campbell of the supposed superiority of the Hollanders in the
words of>a London merchant named Lamb, who told Cromwell (II, 327):
“In Holland, when a merchant dies, his property is equally divided among
his children, and the business is continued and expanded, with all its traditions
and inherited experience. In England, on the contrary, the property goes to
the eldest son, who often sets up for a country gentleman, squanders his
patrimony, and neglects the business by which his father has become enriched.
. . . The honesty of the Hollanders in their manufacturing and commercial
dealings. When goods are made or put up in Holland, they sell everywhere
without question; for the purchaser knows that they are exactly as represented
in quality, weight, and measure.” Laspeyres says that the high position of
Holland was due to religious toleration, and to the fact that persons who were
engaged* in trade were attracted into the country ; also he speaks of the “moral
advantages”, such as frugality and honesty, which also helped to raise the
whole tone of social life, and as a further factor he states that the question of
religious denomination did not enter into business dealings (pp. 122-124 ).
None of the other writers has mentioned this point, although both Douglas
Campbell and Busken-Huet connect the flourishing state of the republic with its
Puritan Calvinism. In general, too, the researches of Weber are very illuminating
on this whole question; cf. Weber: Antikritisches, u.s.w., pp. 186-188, and his
Schlusswort, pp. 570-371 . He describes the Puritanism of the Netherlands as one
which continually “broke down at important points, even though not at all
points”. Their missionary efforts in the colonies, for example, were suppressed ;
indeed, in the colonies as a whole the religious life was made to conform to the
interests o^trade, and in spite of certain scruples slavery was justified (. Laspeyres ,
106, III).
420 (p. 000.) Cf. Miinsterberg: Die Amerikaner , 1504, and W. von Polenz : Das Land
der Zuhunfty 1903 ; both these books, however, throw very little light on this
question at this point ; even in Tocqueville there are only hints and suggestions ;
W. Muller: Das religiose Leben in Amerika , 1911, does not give very much ; there
is more in the works of Rauschenbusch. Max Weber gives a good many individual
examples, which are drawn from his study of the resemblance between the
Pietism of the Lower Rhine andofWestphaliaandthe Puritan groups of England
and America. Just because these groups are so different these resemblances are
all the more valuable evidence for the existence of a definite social-ethical
tendency and result of Calvinism (these two do not always coincide). Weber
lays stress on the fact that these results happened in very unfavourable sur-
roundings, like East Friesland and the young English colonies. It is, of course,
understood that in each case other influences beside that of Calvinism have
also contributed to bring about these results.
421 (p. 688 .) For the conception of Christian Socialism connected with
Neo-Calvinism, see Rauschenbusch und Holl: Calvinreden , p. 35. — For the relation
to Lutheranism, see the characteristic observations of Kuyper , p. 15: “In all
VOL. II. II
946 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Lutheran countries the Reformation started rather with the princes than
among the people, and thus it came to be under the power of the Government
. . . and in consequence it has not transformed either social or political life
by the power of its own vital principles. Lutheranism has remained churchly
and theological; Calvinism alone has set its seal upon all the expressions of
human life, both within and without the Church. No one speaks of Lutheranism
as of the creation of a distinctive form of life, even the name is seldom men-
tioned ; whereas all students of history agree in ever-increasing measure to
salute Calvinism as the creator of a distinctive world of human life.” Thus
Calvinism feels itself to be the one great Christian social system alongside of
Catholicism ( p . io): “Of Romanism alone can we say that it has incorporated
its own thought about life in a distinctive world of sentiment and practical
expression. But alongside of, and over against, this Romanism, Calvinism
arose, not simply as a system of Church reform, but in order to create a quite
different form of human life, to give to human society another form of existence,
and to fill the human heart with other and different ideals and conceptions.”
“This unity of the conception of life we do not find in the narrow idea of
Protestantism . . . but alone in the mighty historical process, which, in the
form of Calvinism, drove its way through circumstances, aryl hollowed out a
channel, through which the powerful current of its life could flow. It is, thanks
to this consciousness of unity within Calvinism that you here in America, and
we in Europe, can again take up our position alongside of Romanism, *and over
against modern Pantheism.” — So far as Catholicism is concerned, here is the
contrasting picture, mentioned by Prezzolini: Wesen , Geschichte und £iele des
Modernismus, pp. 98-60: “The Catholic ideal is a well-fed people, who think
little, and are led and controlled by a theocracy. But this kind of social activity
is utterly different from that which grew up during the nineteenth century,
and, indeed, at two points: (a) in the predominance of the priesthood, and
( b ) in the exercise of charity. . . . The predominance of the theocracy is
replaced by a strong emphasis upon the laity, and the idea of charity is replaced
by that of the necessity for a fundamental social reform. . . . The attitude of
Latin Catholics towards social democracy is divided. The Old Catholics
represent the standpoint of love to one’s neighbour and of good-will, and they
are perpetually criticising economic Liberalism. . . . They believe that it would
suffice if guilds on the mediaeval pattern and all kinds of co-operative societies
were established, and more scope were given to the laity within the parishes. . . .
Their highest ideal is that of a mediaeval society established upon a theocratic
basis, with trade unions among the workpeople. The young Catholics are
gradually becoming bolder ; they desire more modern and quicker methods,
and they do not shrink from imitating the methods of Social Democracy, and,
in contrast to the Old Catholics, they refuse to combine with the reactionary
bourgeois parties in politics.” Hence, as is well known, in Italy they have been
censured by the Pope.
433 (p. 692.) Cf. Hegler: Geist und Schrift bei Sebastian Franck , 1892 y p . 168 n.
The significance of the Sermon on the Mount ought to be emphasized still
more strongly, as this has been done in the writings of L. Keller, which will
be mentioned shortly. For the significance of the Sermon on the Mount as an
ideal of life among the Baptists, see Gottfried Arnold: Unparteiische Kirchen - und
Ketzerhistorie , 1700, //, pp. 529 jf. We find the same thing in Sebastian Frajick:
Chronica , Z^buch und Geschichtsbibel , 1 536, in the Ketzerchronik, p. 146: “Therefore
there belong to these (to those who falsely reverence the Scriptures) all those
who thus break up the Scriptures and who do not observe one word of God
PROTESTANTISM
947
as strictly as another, and who do not preach so willingly and so frequently
from the fifth to the seventh chapter of Matthew and the sixth chapter of Luke
as they do from the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians.** Cf. also Dilthey in
his important essay, Auffassung und Analyse des Menschen im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert ,
Archiv.f. Gesch. d. Philos ., V , 1892 ; his words on p. 278 are very striking : “In the
Protestant community the principle of the inner Word was in conflict with
that of the Scriptures — the Gospels with Paul — the Apostolic life with mankind
as it is — the Christian ideal with statecraft — above all, however, the Word
of the Bible with the progressive form of religious life produced by the
Reformation.**
434 (p. 693.) Illuminating, though decidedly grim in its irony, is the treatise
of Luther, in this connection, entitled Wider die himmlischen Propheten von den
Bildern und Sakrament , of 1525 ( B . A. Ergdnzungsband, I). So far as both Luther
and his opponents regarded the whole Bible, and Paul in particular, as an
inspired authority, Luther’s attack is certainly right, and it represents the
logical consequence of his fundamental ideas. This situation is excellently
described by Erbkam : Gesch. d. prot. Sekten , 1848 , pp. 167-171 , 483-488 . The
development out of mysticism is very well described in the book by Braun ,
which has already been mentioned, Bedeutung der Konkupiszenz in Luthers Leben
und Lehre, 1908. The most recent study, based on newly discovered early works
of Luther by Sc heel: Entwickelung L.s bis zum Abschluss der Vorlesung fiber den
Romerbrief (Sc hr if ten des Vereins fur Ref Gesch., 1910) underestimates the sig-
nificance of the mystical element in an amazing way ; see in particular pp. 192 f
and 201 f. For Luther’s connection with mysticism see also the excellent work
of H. Hering: Die Mystik Luthers, 1879. See also above, pp. 494 ff.
488 (p. 694.) Cf. Karl Muller: Kirche, Gemeinde und Obrigkeit nach Luther, 1910 ,
especially pp. 32-40, 84. I consider Muller's argument entirely valid; it also
agrees with my own conception, see above, pp. 487-494. Even in these smaller
communities Luther has retained the general Church conception of an organ
of salvation produced by the Word. His idea was simply that these groups were
to be smaller and more closely knit circles within the Church itself, and that
gradually from these groups the influence of the Word should be carried out
into the popular and national churches. All that they possess is due only to the
effect of the Word, but it is the real, strong, and visible effect of the Word which
is concentrated here and which finally should be spread outwards over the
whole. Thus the general idea of the Church is maintained, but within it there
still takes place a certain approximation to the ideas of the sect. In all this the
idea of the Church certainly predominates, and in consequence, upon the whole,
Luther’s development is essentially straightforward, as I have described it
above. He did not suddenly incline towards the sect and then return to the
Church ; he only made the attempt to make room for the sect-idea within the
Church. That, however, is a very difficult matter, and that is why in this
question Luther did not get beyond the stage of drawing up plans. The decisive
element is the idea of the Church, which determines all the rest. This has
already been understood quite rightly by Erbkam, pp. 9-13 . — I therefore do
not agree with Rieker and Achelis that this approach to the sect simply meant
that for a time and against his own principles Luther was influenced by the
Baptists ; in my opinion this approximation towards the idea of the sect was
due to an inner conflict within his own thought which arose from his study of
the Bible.
4M (p. 694.) Appeals to the younger Luther, who is supposed to have betrayed
his earlier ideals, are general among the Dissenters. Hochhuth gives examples in
948 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
his great series of articles from the published records of the Hess. Archiven ,
Z.f. hist. Theol. , XXVIII-XXXII ; especially XXVIII , pp. 542, , 6jj;
/>. 77,9. Here is the letter of an Anabaptist : “Even their own prophet, Martinus
Luther, has also written about these things (in a little book which is called
Eine Weise christlichi Mass zu halten) that people should come together behind
closed doors and set things in order. Once again he said : *1 am not yet bold
enough to begin such a thing lest it should be thought to be some kind of
fanatical sect.’ ” Everywhere here the complaints are given as the reason for
the Anabaptist movement that the new Church achieves nothing in the moral
sphere, and that Luther did not venture to continue his first attempt for lack
of genuine Christians to carry out his ideas. — The interpretation which
W. Kohler , in the reformatio Hassiaca , has given as a working out of the same
Lutheran ideas, is also connected with this subject. ( Entstehung der ref eccles.
Hassiae of 1526 , Deutsche Z»f Kirchenrecht , 1906, pp. 199-232). Even when in the
case of Lambert these ideas were attributed at an earlier period to Franciscan
ideals, the instinct was still right because they are sect-ideals ; but at the time
the fact was overlooked that Luther himself in his earlier period had tried to
unite these ideas with his later conception of the Church; cf. W. Kohler: Z u
Luthers Kirchenbegriff, Chr. W ., 1907 . — Among the Independents, William Dell,
who has already been mentioned, and who will be treated more fully in a later
section of this book, referred expressly to Luther in his original combination of
mystical, Congregationalist, and State Church ideas ; see Sippell: William Dells
Programm einer “ lutherischen ” Gemeinschaftsbewegung , 1911. So far as Schwenkfeld
is concerned, Ecke , in his Schwenkfeld , Luther und der Gedanke einer apostolischen
Reformation , 1911, and also Sippell , in his article, Caspar Schwenkfeld , Chr. W.,
1911 , Nr. 37-41 , have shown the connection with Luther’s ideas. — Franck , in
the splendidly objective article, Martin Luther , in his Ketzerchronik , emphasizes
the idea of the more exclusive Christian community with its own sacramental
celebrations (II, 173b ). Hegler points out everywhere that Franck and the
Anabaptists have a close connection with the original ideas of the Reformation.
— But Gottfried Arnold also is quite clear upon this point. Thus Arnold appeals
to Luther’s original rejection of war, in which he agreed with the Anabaptists ;
cf. also Franck's Kriegbiichlein. “After which Luther altered his opinion which
had been previously formed in harmony with the Will of Christ, because he
felt that the Gospel does not do away with Natural Law” ( Arnold , It, n and 12).
In his opinion, Luther’s ideas were “stifled by the jurists” (II, 20). The urgent
impulse towards real sanctification which characterized the earlier stages of
Luther’s career, in which Luther’s monastic ideals were still active (II, 46) r
which, however, unfortunately he gave up later on (II, 93). The idea of
particular smaller communities as a useful adjunct is emphasized in II, 132;
practice of electing pastors by the congregation unfortunately given up (II, r6i) ;
likewise prohibition of usury unfortunately given up (II, 162). — Spener's
Pia desideria appeals, it is true, in reference to the Collegia Biblica not to Luther’s
ideal of groups of genuine Christians, but to his ideal of the priesthood of
all believers (see Edition of 1 706, p. 109). Further, to Luther’s recommendations
of Tauler, Thomas k Kempis, and the Theologia Germanica, p. 140; he also
emphasizes the Christian Utopian characteristics of the Lutheran ethic:
avoiding of lawsuits (p. 41) ; communal holding of possessions in a different but
analogous sense like that of the Early Church in Jerusalem (p. 43) ; everywhere
in general recourse to the Apostolic Church and the assurance that that was
no respublica Platonica. For the relation of the Pietist Collegia Biblica to Luther’s
“more exclusive groups”, see K. Muller: Kirche, Gemeinde, u.s.w.,pp. 83 ff.
PROTESTANTISM
949
440 (p» 695 •) The most important presentation of the subject is given by
Gottfried Arnold in his Kirchen u. Keizer geschichte, a Church history which is not
yet out of date and which can still be used along with modern Church histories.
It uses an unbelievable wealth of source-material, and brings one into the
atmosphere of the Protestantism outside the Churches as no other book does.
Further, there is also Sebastian Franck's famous Geschichtsbibel , in which the
Ketzerchronik is incorporated ; here the Anabaptists are described with special
emphasis, and obviously out of a wide personal experience and exhaustive
research. Bullinger: Der Wiedertaufer Ur sprung, Fiirgang , Sekten, We sen, Zurich,
1560. This writer takes one into the hostile atmosphere of a national Church
and into the relative right of defence ; a national Church could not come to
terms with these people. — Modern presentations of the subject suffer, above all,
from this defect, that they do not distinguish between this Anabaptist, sectarian
movement, and mysticism ; while in actual fact the two were often united they
are, nevertheless, distinct in the inner structure of thought. The custom of early
heresy-hunters to call all heretics “ Schwenkfeldiani , Anibaptistae et alii id genus"
and then to include them all under one head, and Luther’s habit of calling
them all fanatics and saying that they perpetuate the Catholic heresy of good
works, legalism, And monasticism, has greatly obscured our understanding of
this subject. Hegler , who is the most expert and understanding student of this
subject, has rightly warned us that we ought to distinguish between the two,
and in so’doing, above all, he has already pointed out the sociological differences
between the two; Anzeige von Harnacks Dogmengeschichte Theol. Litztg. , rgo8,
pp . 253-258. — Rilschl ( Gesch . d. Pietismus, I) also follows Luther’s and Bullinger’s
track; “as a Lutheran theologian” and Churchman he feels obliged “to adhere
to the opinion of the Reformers” (p. 7), hence he argues that the Anabaptist
movement and mysticism have developed out of Catholicism — mainly, it is
true, out of the popular expansions of the Franciscan movement, whose origins,
therefore, were not well known. At the same time he recognized the difference
between the sect and mysticism as something which “in itself is quite a matter
of indifference” (pp. 28, 35) ; but he thinks that the coupling of both together
arose already out of monasticism, which, on the one hand, desires to renew the
Apostolic life of detachment from the world, and, on the other hand, owing to
the fact th^t it had no profession or occupation within the world, very naturally
gave way to mysticism of an emotional kind ! — Ludwig Keller has also maintained
that the Anabaptists were non-Protestant in character ( Reformat . d. dlteren
Reformparteien , 1885, Staupitz und Anfange d. Reform ., 1888, Anfange d. Reform, u.
Ketzerschulen , 16J97), but for his part he does not attribute this to Catholicism,
but to the voluntary Church, purely primitively Christian, which had a separate
existence from the time of Constantine — the so-called early Evangelical com-
munities who had a high standard of social morality and religious toleration —
which, with Peter Waldo and the Anabaptists, only underwent a certain
transformation, and which in his opinion represent the genuine Christian
tradition as compared with Catholicism and Protestantism. Even though this
idea of “early Protestant communities” at least in this form may be a fantasy
picture, still the researches of Keller are certainly very instructive and stimulat-
ing. His chief defect is that he does not analyse clearly enough the essence of the
sect in contradistinction to that of the Church, and that he includes under his
conception of the sect all forms of opposition to the Established Church,
mysticism, humanism, etc. In particular, the failure to distinguish between
mysticism and the sect in the case of the Friends of God, Tauler, etc., makes
it very difficult to get any clear picture of the real situation. He always makes
950 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
mysticism and the sect explain one another; “the theology of the latter must
be used as the complement of German mysticism at every point in which the
latter is in the habit of evading a definite pronouncement !” Staupitz, 143:
Mysticism is said to be only “half the system of the earlier Protestants’* ( ebd .,
224 ). If now the Anabaptist movement does not quite correspond to this
mingled ideal, consisting of mysticism and a tolerant voluntary Church, this
then must be ascribed to the fact that the Anabaptists in earlier times had
transferred to the whole Church an ascetic doctrine and a rejection of the
world which was only meant for Apostles (ebd., 321 ) — a statement which is
nowhere proved. All this points to the fact that these component parts which
Keller combines ought to be separated, and that the problem of the origin of
each from the Middle Ages and of its relation to the Reformation principle
must be stated. Then, however, the phantom of the early Protestant com-
munities disappears altogether, and the relation between the Anabaptists and
the earlier sects proved by Keller loses the striking significance which Keller
gives it as the apologist of the “early Protestant communities”; he even argues
that the Reformation was due to them through Staupitz. — Thudichum: Die
deutsche Reformat., 1517-37, 1307-1303, follows Keller's line; he obliterates the
difference between the sect and mysticism with the words* (II, 114): “The
expression ‘mystics’, which the newer Protestant theologians are so fond of
using, which really means esoterists (Geheimtuer), is very unsuitable, and it is
high time that we avoided this foreign word.” — The whole question* appears
under a different aspect among those who hold that the Anabaptists and
“spiritual reformers” are the logical result of the principle of Church fellowship
and of liberty of conscience of the Reformation, like Weingarten: Revolutions -
kirchen Englands, 1868, p. 442; and A. Dorner: Grundriss der Dogmengeschichte, 1833 ,
pp. 253 ff. Thinkers of this school usually overlook the fact that the Dissenters
are also in the direct line of the mediaeval development, only they belong to
a tendency which is different from that which the Reformers are carrying
forward. The emphasis on a manifold relationship with the ideas of the
Reformation, which had not yet become ecclesiastically settled, is quite right. —
The able book by Erbkam still deserves attention at the present day ; it contains
much suggestive matter, but he is quite wrong in his conclusions. In his
opinion the Anabaptists represent ethical mysticism, while the “spiritual
reformers” represent intellectual mysticism. Together they are thus supposed
to be a continuous supplement, brought down from the Middle Ages, of the
objective and institutional character of the Church, which ought to have
formed the complementary movement in Protestantism. These movements,
however, broke away from Protestantism in an unhealthy manner, and some
of them merged into pantheism; he concludes by pointing out the peril of
separation from the Church as the organ of salvation. — A wealth of source-
material, and an illumination of the whole movement from local points of
view, can be found in Hochhuth: Protestant. Sektengeschichte in Hessen , Z- f hist.
Theologie, XXVIII-XXXII. Here also everything starts from the Reformation
and the criticism of its defective moral achievement. — There is an excellent
description of the German Anabaptist movement in Cornelius: Gesch. d. Miins-
terschen Aufruhrs, 1855-60; a socialistically coloured collective description in
E. Belfort Bax: Rise and Fall of the Anabaptists, London, 1303 (the closing chapter
is particularly important with its indications of continuations in the English
Revolution) ; from the Baptist standpoint, A. H. Newman: History of Antipeda-
baptism, Philadelphia, 1897, the most detailed account of the whole movement,
unfortunately only until 1609 ; finally, the article “ Tdufer ”, by Kramer: PRE*. —
PROTESTANTISM
95 *
There is also a good deal of important material in Gobel: Gesch . des christl. Lebens.
For the connection of this movement (including the Pietist Separatist groups)
with the weaving and cloth-making industries, which appeared especially
among the Waldensians, see I, 37-39 ; for the connection with the numerous
Waldensians of the Rhineland, I, 40-42. Gobel connects with this also the
victory of Calvinism over Lutheranism in these lands, since Calvinism was
more closely related to the Waldensian ascetic Christians. A very good descrip-
tion of the Baptist movement as a sect-type (/, pp. 143- 149). Here also his view
is fair : “a quite definite tendency of Christian life which, in its fanatical form,
could indeed be fought against and also violently stamped out, but in its
truth and necessity could never be completely suppressed and overcome”,
“it also should be definitely recognized as a Christian movement” (/, 133).
In Pietism he sees only the reappearance of this tendency ; /, 757, and in other
places. In all this, however, he has not distinguished clearly enough between
the ideas of the sect-type and of mysticism.
441 (p. 696.) Cf. the description in G. Arnold , II, 264 ff., and 524 ff., who,
however, separates himself clearly from them: “Although there was much
human foolishness, blindness, and weakness among them, there was also to
be seen in many # a great simplicity and fidelity of obedience, because they tried
to follow the letter of Scripture with so great exactitude, that also in so doing
they fell into other untimely opinions (this means that they became exclusive
and intolerant) and they themselves came into disrepute and fell on evil
days.” Arnold himself sides with the mystics. In Arnold, II, 266, we have Luther’s
opinion: “This monster can be controlled neither by sword nor by fire. They
leave wife, child, house, and farm, all that they have.” Also the opinion of
Melanchthon: “No one should be distressed when they see the Anabaptists
going to death so confidently and suffering so many things, because Satan has
hardened their hearts.” The Calvinist controversialist, Hornbeck, is somewhat
milder: “It was not so much that the Anabaptists withstood the orthodox
Protestants with their doctrine by adding another or a new doctrine, as that
they did not quite understand the doctrine of orthodox Protestantism.” In
Arnold, 11,524 , we have a later orthodox opinion : “If I regard the Anabaptists
and the Mennonites they seem to lead forsooth a hypocritical kind of life, they
avoid fine clothes, swearing, lying, gluttony, drinking, adultery, villainy,
quarrels, and contentions like the devil, so that whoever comes into their
community or their society stands almost amazed, thinking that he has not
come among men, but among angels in the form of men, or, at least, that he is
among living saints and elect, genuine Christians.” — Of fundamental impor-
tance also is the description given by Sebastian Franck ( Ketzerchronik , 193-201 ),
whom Keller very wrongly calls a “genuine Baptist” {Ref., p. 462), and who in
any case knows nothing about Keller’s early Protestant communities. Franck
says simply about their origin : “In the year 1526, both during and after the
Peasants’ Revolt, there arose a new sect and a separate Church founded upon
the letter of Scripture which some call Anabaptists and others Baptists, who
began to separate themselves from others with a particular baptism and to
despise all other communities as unchristian ; also they believed that no one
could be saved or be their brother who did not belong to their sect or their
party. They began to baptize all those who joined them for the second time,
ot± rather, as they gave out, to baptize according to the command of Christ. . . .
Their overseer and bishop was first Balthasar Hiibner, then Melchior Rink,
followed by Joh. Hut, Joh. Denck, Ludwig Hetzer. . . . They appeared to teach
nothing but love, faith, and the Cross, in much suffering they showed them-
952 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
selves patient and humble; they broke bread with one another as a sign of
unity and love; they helped each other faithfully with lending, borrowing,
giving away, and they taught that all things should be in common ; they called
each other brethren. If, however, anyone did not belong to their sect they
scarcely greeted him, they would not stretch out the hand to him, they kept
together, and increased so greatly from year to year that the world was afraid
that they would cause an uproar/ * The terrible persecution and the number of
martyrdoms convinced the masses that these were true Christians, and thus
they again gathered large numbers of adherents. Then it seems that many
Baptists went beyond the good which was undoubtedly in them. “They
became in spirit somewhat uppish, they began to judge everyone, anc^in many
places they became disunited amongst themselves and they had as many
doctrines as they had leaders. . . . Although I entirely believe that it is true
that many pious, simple people were and still are in this sect, and that many
of their leaders also have been ardent for God, but to my thinking not with
knowledge. However, one ought not thus to tyrannize over them when they
are obstinate and will not allow themselves to be taught, but we must commend
them to God, who alone can give faith, root out heresy, and give good counsel
in the whole matter.” These are the characteristic features of the sect-type
until the present day. “In their communities there is so much excommunication
that every community excommunicates the other, and there is as much
freedom to believe what they will as there is among the Anabaptists. Vyhoever
in their communities does not say Yes in all these matters, they say that
God has stopped his ears, and they begin to pray for him with sighs and tears.
If he does not soon change his mind they cast him out” (193*). Thence also
a great confusion : “Although all sects are split amongst themselves, yet the
Baptists are so specially disunited and broken up amongst themselves that I do
not know how to describe anything certain and complete about them” (i93 b ).
If we tabulate the different shades of opinion which Franck describes, we find
that there are two main groups : those who have joined settled organizations
and are bound by the law of the Scriptures, and those who favour rather
enthusiasm and mysticism, and therefore become individualists without fellow-
ship, but who still find their adherence essentially in Baptist circles. Later on
we shall hear more about this difference. The “free Baptists”, which were so
called from the time of Bullinger, were not Baptists, but spiritual Klealists. —
Schwenkfeld and Franck agree. Cf. Ecke, 89, 204-212.
442 (p* 6970 Cf. the well-known collections of passages in which Lutheranism
testifies against itself in Dollinger and Janssen. Still more striking is the treatment
of the subject by the honest Gottfried Arnold, and this point of view also prevails
in Franck’s Geschichtsbibel. Quite rightly Hegler has attempted to understand
Franck entirely from this point of view, just as Ecke has tried to do with
Schwenkfeld. Also in the splendid book by Paul Drews : Der evang. Geistliche i. d.
deutsch . Vergangenheit, 1905, the description of the moral condition both of the
clergy and of the laity gives a very dark picture. It is not sufficient to explain
this meagre success as the after-result of earlier Catholic education, or to recall
the later chaos caused by war. The very limited moral success of the Reforma-
tion is certainly due to something in its own nature ; see Ecke , 88. The ideals
were too high and the means of education were limited. It was impossible to
realize these ideals until Pietism undertook the care of souls, and later the more
humane morality of the Enlightenment, and popular education were also of
great use. How very limited this morality was, however, is revealed, for
example, by the well-known autobiography of the notorious Magister Lauck-
PROTESTANTISM
953
hardt. The raising of the average morality of the masses has, indeed, in general
only been achieved by elementary education and the modern State, in which
then, however, the ideals were not primarily drawn from a highly idealistic
Lutheranism.
445 (P* 699*) Thus it appears as though Munzer left the circle influenced by
Luther and went over into the conventicles of Zwickau ( Thudichum , /, 215 ) ;
Keller also has made it seem probable that Grebel was connected with the
Waldensians ( Reformation , 381-388 ) ; also it is obvious that many of the Baptist
preachers had already been leaders of conventicles even before Adult Baptism
had been introduced ( Ketzerschulen , 32). In the protocols of the trials of the
Anabaptists which are mentioned in Wappler: Inquisition und Ketzcrprozess in
Zwickau , 1908, there are several references to a Waldensian origin (pp. 121 ,
I2 3 jff •)• On the other hand, the heretical “godless painters of Nurnberg”, with
whom Denck was in touch, seem to have been of a very different character.
447 (p. 702.) An opponent ofjoh. Arndt says very strikingly, even though with
the characteristic disapproval of Arnold : “Those people would be wrong who
would apply to all the teachings contained in Arndt’s or Tauler’s books since
ordinary life requires quite other manners” ( G . Arnold , //, 438). This is also the
central point of Bullinger’s criticism of the Anabaptists ; they are against the
Christian love \thich embraces the whole of humanity and endurance of
circumstances “willed” by God; cf. Sebastian Franck: Ketzerchronik , p. 133.
On the .other hand, Schwenkfcld directs his criticism precisely against the
national Church and recognizes its connection with popular “sacramentalism”
( Ecke , 103).
460 (p. 706.) Cf. the sketch in Barclay: The Inner Life , pp . 79-89 . The acceptance
of the Calvinistic ethic of “the calling”, in which the old Baptist asceticism is
only carried on in the avoidance of all outward luxury and all external honours,
is rightly emphasized by Max Weber: Archiv f. Soz., XXI , p. 69. The criticism
of the Radicals from the standpoint of “spiritualist” asceticism frequently in
Hylkema: Reformateurs ; further, see Kramer: PRE z y the article on Memo und
Mennoniten; also Gobel , II, 690-697. Here is an extract from a letter by
William III of Orange: “I have always been assured of the submissive and
peaceful spirit of the Mennonites, who behave themselves with resignation and
perfect obedience towards their superiors, leading a peaceful and laborious life
and contributing willingly to the upkeep of the State and of the country in
which they live, to which they render themselves useful by their industry and
their work.” Here also there is information about their industrial capitalistic
character.
463 (p. 707.) The Particular (that is, Predestinarian) Baptists are not to be
connected with this. The latter are pure Calvinists who deduced Adult Baptism
from the theory of the Free Churches, just as, on the other hand, the Free
Churches in their day arose out of the ideal of believers’ Baptism. That becomes
plain when we remember the formal connection between the Free Church
and the sect-ideal which was explained when we were dealing with Calvinism ;
Newman , p. 393; Barclay , p. 318 : “They consisted of little companies of
respectable, godly people, gathered from Presbyterian worship, into what they
deemed a more Scriptural form of Church discipline, and gradually became
convinced of the importance and Scriptural sanction of immersion.”
464 (P* 7°9«) Gf. Glass: The Barebones Parliament. Weingarten makes too little
distinction between the Anabaptists and Independents; his statement on
p. 138: “In Cromwell the Anabaptist movement reaches its high-water mark,
but it was also his doing that Anabaptism ceased to be a power”, is only
954 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
accurate to a very limited extent. Further, Gooch: The History of English Demo-
cratic Ideas in the Seventeenth Century, Cambridge, 1898, a very solid and instructive
book, which Weingarten expands and carries further. For the economic and
social historical side of the matter, cf. the important work by E. Bernstein:
Kommunistische und sozicdistische Stromungen wahrend der englischen Revolution des
18. Jahrh.,m“Geschichte des Sozialismus inEinzeldarstellungen” , I, 1895, pp. 507-718 ;
here, of course, according to socialistic historical dogma all that is religious is
only a transparent veil for economic social endeavours which are here present
in their pre-Marxian, thatis, their ideological, and, indeed, Christian Anabaptist,
stage ; further, Belfort Bax: Rise and Fall of the Anabaptists, London , 1903, in which
the whole is indirectly ascribed to the Baptist movement. — All the, accounts
recognized the essentially Baptist character of the later radical movement,
which removes the Presbyterian and Calvinistic-Independent character ; both
the accounts of the question and the sources make constant reference to strong
remnants of radical Baptists ; cf. Weingarten, pp. 1 03-103, the witness of Baillies,
Weingarten, pp. 127, 179, Anm. 2, 263. Further, Gooch, 73-75, 128-129, 174 ff.,
267-270 ; Bernstein , 509, 522; Vorspiel im Jahre 1549 , 523-327; Lollharden und
Tdufcr. For the relation to Luther see a pamphlet in Weingarten, p. 114: “The
time of Jerome of Prague or of Luther was but a little better Jhan the darkest
time of Popery.” That is the language of Baptists and of “spiritual reformers”.
There are many references to the radical Baptists who are distinguished from
the peaceful General Baptists in Barclay: The Inner Life, and in the important
book by Firth: Cromwell's Army, 1902, which, unfortunately, does not pursue
this subject in further detail. Dispute of the Army Chaplains about Infant
Baptism (p. 325) ; in favour of lay preaching, by Lieut. Chillandon in the tract,
Preaching Without Ordination ; the lieutenant became an Anabaptist preacher.
P. 336: Lay preaching, especially that of the officers, came into being because
the Presbyterian pastors were withdrawn from the army. Firth, 334 ff., likewise
Bernstein, 546. It was connected with Chiliasm, since at the coming of the
Kingdom the settled ministry will disappear. This lay preaching of the officers
and their religious discussions, easily led to religious-political theories (Firth,
p. 337). Yet the right of free preaching was never unrestricted and uncontrolled ;
it ended with the cleansing of the army from all “Anabaptist” elements,
whereby, however, Cromwell expressly desired to retain the more peaceful
“Anabaptist” in the army. A pamphlet of 1655 (Firth, 342 ff.) thuff addresses
Cromwell : “And so were you at Dunbar in Scotland, or at least you seemed
so by your words and your actions ; for you spake as pure Independency as any
of us all then, and made this an argument why we should fight stoutly because
we had the prayers of the Independents and Baptist Churches. So highly did
you seem to love the Anabaptists then, that you did not only invite them into
the army, but entertained them in your family.” The ethical religious argument
for the war against the previous authority was at first that of the Huguenots,
the Scots, and the Calvinists, the soldier’s catechism in Firth, 330, and the tract
by Bridge about the right of armed resistance in Hanbury: Historical Memorials
Relating to the Independents , II, 189 ff. With the incursion of Chiliasm the argu-
ment becomes different : the task is now to prepare for the Kingdom of Christ.
A tract by Archer entitled The Personal Reign of Christ upon Earth, 1642, which
Herr Sippell has most kindly lent me, is particularly instructive upon this
point. With that the conception of the right of war becomes very similar to that
of the Baptists or is directly dependent upon it. — Otherwise the influencing of
the army through politics is the result of the break with Parliament and signifies
the rise of a definite political and social class in the army (Firth, 318, 351-354 ).
PROTESTANTISM
955
Originally consisting of men who had been impressed, it had no interest of
its own. Since 1651 the army consists only of volunteers because its one aim
is to fight for one’s people and one’s religion. The real headquarters of these
volunteers was from the beginning in Cromwell’s cavalry. — For the absolute
Natural Law of the sect which arose with that at the same time in contrast
to the relative Natural Law of the Church, and the Natural Law of the social
contract of the Huguenot and Scottish type which was still conceived on class
lines, see Gooch , pp. 108 ff., also pp. 117 and 133-162 ( Ireton ) ; the transition to
radicalism,//*. 176 (Godwin) and 180 (Milton) ; the radical Natural Law of the
Primitive State, of Reason, and of Christ, without compromise with sin,
pp . 184 ffp, ng , 328. Particularly in the treatise of Berens about the Diggers,
which will be mentioned directly : “First we demand yea or no, whether the
earth with her fruits was made to be bought and sold from one to another?
And whether one part of mankind was made to be a lord of the land and
another part a servant by the law of Creation before the Fall?” For Bunyan,
see Belfort Bax , pp. 379-381.
465 (P- 7 11 *) Forthe “Levellers” thebest account in Gooch, pp. 139- 157, 193-206,
256-239. Here the conception of Weingarten seems the most singular ; he secs
in them disguised Rationalists and even the beginnings of Deism, because he
does not recognize the absolute Natural Law in its identity with Reason and
the law of Christ as the early sect-idea. The absolute Law of Nature appears
to him to be modern Rationalism, which it is not. Bernstein goes still further :
he thinks that the religious element was merely superficial and was only used
as a cover for something else. The treatise by Overton : Man's Mortality , to which
he appeals, pp. 579 ff., still only denies the so-called intermediate State and
teaches a full physical resurrection. The Epicurean expressions of Walwyn
{pp. 581 ff.) show a good deal more, although they are reported by opponents.
In Lilburn himself and the whole movement there can be no doubt at all
about the essentially spiritual and religious basis. The rejection of dogma and
of the plan of salvation, also its allegorizing tendency, reveals a spirituality
of the type of Sebastian Franck, but not a concealed surrender of its religious
basis. The treatise, entitled The Craftsman's Craft, 1649 > quoted by Weingarten:
p . 307, as well as the treatise written in defence of Walwyn, The Charity of
Churchmen fboth probably by the same writer), has been made known to me by
the kindness of Herr Sippell. Of the religious element it contains more than
the mere confession of the existence of God quoted by W. It defends Overton’s
expression of opinion about the mortality of the body (which was touched
upon above), expressly asserting the resurrection of the spirit and its reincarna-
tion; it protects itself, further, with a characteristic limitation, against the
reproach of Anabaptism of the Munster pattern: “Where proofs are wanting
there are resemblances insinuated in their stead ; and comparisons made either
in such things as are true of neither, or else the Party that is to be made odious
is likened to such as are already in some particulars not material; and yet thereby is
suggested a similitude in all the rest." This, however, amounts to a confession of
the Baptist ideal, apart from some particulars not material. Above all, there is
the argument of the demand of the “Levellers” as a movement : “We answer,
that we cannot suppose, nor do we think any rational man to believe, the thing
unlawful in itself; for then the primitive Christians did what was unlawful." The
principle in itself is Christian and reasonable ; only it must not be forced upon
people with violence : “To make it lawful there must be an unanimous and
individual consent of every man thereunto.” This also shows in what consisted
the particulars , which the “Levellers” disapproved in the Munster Anabaptists ;
956 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
in the spirit of violence which was against the Christian spirit. The statement
quoted by Weingarten,p. 304, shows, however, only the spirituality of the people,
whose non-rationalistic spirit we shall learn more about later on.
456 (p. 712.) Cf. Gooch, pp. 214-223; Bernstein, pp. 383-608; above all, the book
by Berens: The Digger Movement in the Days of the Commonwealth , London , 1306 ,
which provides the most important account of the subject. The fact that W.
describes God as Reason, or Creative Reason, has led many people to think
that these ideas are essentially rationalistic. W., however, begins with the
Familists and ends with the Quakers. The Creative Reason is the Logos identical
with the indwelling Christ: “This spirit of Reason is not without a man, but
within every man ; hence he need not to run after others to tell him of to teach
him ; for this Spirit is his Maker, He dwells in him, and if the flesh were subject
thereunto he would daily find teaching therefrom, though he dwelt alone and
saw the face of no other man” (p. 43). “Even so, Christ, which is the spreading
Power, is now beginning to fill every man and woman with Himself. He will
dwell and rule in everyone : and the Law of Reason and equity shall be Christ
in them. . . . This is the Church, the great congregation which, when the
mystery is completed, shall be the mystical Body of Christ all set at liberty from
inward and outward straits and bondage, and this is called thoholy breathing,
that made all new by Himself and for Himself” ( p . 67). “The Golden Rule, do
to another as thou wouldst have another do to thee, which God, Christ, and
Scripture have enacted for a law” (p. 171). “The law of creation and equity
of the Scriptures” (p. 138). “That their intent is to restore the Creation to its
former condition” (p. 37). In this sense the idea is always also that of the
birthright or of the inborn right, or of the rights of humanity. Here already
we meet this significant idea, and, indeed, as one which is based upon religion.
The birthright is, at the same time, the pre-Norman English right of the
people, as once in the Wycliffe movement; before the Conquest the Law of
Nature prevailed. Such passages are innumerable ; this is the Christian Natural
Law in the form of the sect which is well known to us, and, further, it is united
with mystical spirituality. For W.'s relation to the Baptists, see/). 63 (they are
too external for him). — For Plockboy, see Bernstein, pp. 683-634 , and Laspeyres,
pp. 103 ff . — For Bellers, see Bernstein , pp. 634-728.
468 (P* 7 * 4 *) For this cf. my treatment of the subject which ^eals with
Independency and the significance of the Cromwellian period in Kultur d. G.,
IV, 12 , pp. 388-600. The material which is there united is here broken up into
its various component parts, and each one is dealt with in connection with its
position in the course of development. “Independency” is, indeed, something
very great and complicated in which the most varied elements are united.
My treatment of the influence of the Baptist element, which there was dealt
with in a very general manner, and which, further, was too much at that time
under the influence of Weingarten, is now more exactly defined. With that are
removed the partially justified misgivings which were aroused by Loofs in his
Luther und Mittelalter : p. 13.
459 (p. 719.) Cf. the excellent article by Mirbt: Pietismus, in PRE 3 , XV, further
Ritschl; Heppe; Grunberg: Spener , 1833, J 9°5> T 9o6; Gobel: Geschichte d. christlichen
Lebens in der rheinisch-westphdlischen ev. Kirche, 1843 , 1832 , i860. Stephan: Pietismus
als Trdger des Fortschritts, 1308; W. Kohler: Anfdnge des Pietismus in Giessen, 1683-
1633, i n Giessener Festschrift of 1307. For the social connections, see Gustav
Freytag in his Bildem aus der deutschen Vergangenheit; Bertholdt: Die Erweckten im
prot. Deutschland (Raumers historisches Taschenbuch , 1832 and 1833), here the
Calvinistic, non-Spener character of the phenomena, which have been
PROTESTANTISM
957
described, is not taken into account ; Drews: Einfluss der Kirche auf die gesell -
schafilichen Zustande , Z-f- Th. u. K., 1905; Uhlhorn: Liebestdtigkeit , III , 236-261;
especially Ritschl, II, 500-505; Max Weber: Archiv XXI, pp. 39-36. Weingarten
in general does not sufficiently distinguish the various currents of thought,
and unfortunately he has paid no attention to the Pietist current in its difference
from Congregationalism and the Baptist movement in England, even though
incidentally he actually describes it excellently . — RitschVs work — in its own
way magnificent — is based upon the clear recognition of the sectarian character
of Pietism, and for this reason, from the standpoint of a complete bourgeois
and Churchman, is a polemic which on account of its absolutely inquisitorial
penetration is of the highest importance. It is most interesting and instructive
that in Ritschl this hostile attitude towards Pietism is caused by the fact that
he saw clearly that only a Territorial Church system, based upon the doctrine
of the remission of sins, and only a Church which is guided by an objective
ministry, can support the moral relativism necessary for a popular Christianity
of the masses and the relatively moderate Rationalism of a scientific theology.
“Christianity, in the shape of a people’s Church, in order to maintain its own
existence, is obliged to take the middle path in matters of public custom, and
also to allow for many varieties and degrees of individual religious experience”
( 7 , 178). “The # root cause of all Separatism lies in the fact that the relative
character of ecclesiastical relations is not admitted” ( 7 , 430). “Originally
Pietisrq concentrated its attention upon the moral security of the salvation of
each individual in opposition to the world, and on the rejection of all con-
siderations which the Church usually practises towards the world” ( 7 , 450).
“Lutheranism, which gave all its attention to purity of doctrine, remained out
of direct contact with the ethical and aesthetic needs which ought to be met
within the sphere of the religious education of a people.” Thus so far Pietism
in his opinion was already prepared for by the Church itself ( 77 , 88). “He who
in his place does his duty as a Christian must thus judge in the faith that
where the Gospel is purely and sincerely preached there God has His Church.”
( 77 , 131). “A life which starts from conviction of sin and a genuine conversion
may still bring about very many more testing experiences of Christian per-
fection. It has, however, moved away from the sphere of the exclusive Church
connection, and if it finds a corresponding sphere of fellowship in sect or
clique or Enlightenment, this has not been foreseen in that principle” ( 77 , 194 ).
These statements illuminate excellently the spirit of the Church-type. There is,
however, no need to emphasize, on the other hand, the fact that the sect and
mysticism are nearer to primitive Christianity than the Church, and that the
appeal to the Early Church in Jerusalem is relatively justified. — The latter
point has been seen much more clearly and truly by Gobel : “All these orgies
and dangerous excesses (of Pietism) are so closely connected with the (Scrip-
turally) thoroughly justified ways of the Christian life that they still always
ought to be regarded as Christian phenomena; indeed, frequently the right
method only develops itself out of the excess which was originally combined
with sinful one-sidedness and error ; for instance, it was only through mysticism
and Separatism that genuine mysticism and asceticism came to their right
position both in individual believers and in special groups, as well as by a
reflex action in the dominant Church itself” ( 7 , 3). A splendid collective
characterization, which completely agrees with my own conception ( 77 , 617-
621). Mirbt explains Pietistic asceticism as “occupation with Holy Scripture
to whose ascetic elements the Pietisticaliy inclined Bible-reader of that day,
who was already under the influence of eschatological tendencies, brought
958 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
understanding” (XV, 804). — The opinion of Uhlhom, p . 260: “Pietism has not
yet found the right attitude towards secular things, particularly to the State,
to science, and to art. It regards them from its subjective standpoint (that is,
from a non-ecclesiastical standpoint which is only interested in conversion and
the maturity of the individual Christian), as justified so far as they are of use
to it; unlike Lutheranism, it judges by itself that their substance is justified.”
(This is erroneously and obscurely formulated ; it means that over against the
peculiar mixture of world denial and world acceptance in Lutheranism
the Pietistic ethic completes the ascetic consequence by linking up with the
Calvinistic ethic (see Max Weber: Archiv XXI , pp. 46-50), which takes away
from the secular all value of its own, but moulds it in a quite utilitarian way,
rationally and methodically, as a means to an end; hence also the ideals of
Pietism with regard to education are exactly the same as those of Puritanism.)
Piety is for it not the principle of life which penetrates everything, but the sole
content of life. For that reason Pietism has no interest in social questions.
From its point of view such things are just part of “the world”, which it regards
in a cool and detached manner. In spite of the tendency to intervene everywhere
in all these spheres of life, it still remains unfruitful. Pietism has helped to
weaken the importance of the Church in these spheres of li{jp, and it is also
due to it that works of charity, especially the care of the poor, have been
brought into the hands of the State.” — It is important to notice that Ritschl
has entirely ignored English Puritanism, which everywhere merges into
Pietism. Ritschl knew no English, and this circumstance led to very one-sided
results in the studies of those who followed him in this subject. — Here Heppe
and Barclay must complete the picture. — For the social and economic effects,
Weber, pp. 55 ff. : “Quite obviously thus in German Lutheran Pietism the
preparation of the religious need for a present inward, emotional sentiment
thus contained a minimum of stimulus for the rationalizing of activity within
this world, contrasted with the need of the preservation of Calvinistic “saints”
which was directed only towards the future life, whereas they, for their part,
over against the traditionalist piety of the orthodox Lutheran, which centred
in the Word and the Sacrament, were always adapted to develop a maximum
of methodical religious penetration of life.” The increasing development of a
merely emotional tendency is also connected with the social divergence of the
movement towards the clergy and the nobility. “If here we should characterize
one practical consequence of the difference . . . the virtues which Pietism
brought forth may be described rather as those which, on the one hand,
the loyal official, workman, and home-worker, and, on the other hand, the
patriarchally minded employer would display in a condescension which is well-
pleasing to God. Calvinism seems in comparison with that to have a greater
affinity with the hard legal and active spirit of bourgeois capitalistic entre-
preneurs.”-— The peculiarities of Wurttemberg Pietism, which in Germany is the
only kind which has been really popular, are connected with the insignificance
of the nobility in that part, with the disposition of a free peasantry towards
religious individualism and with the early connection in that region of Pietism
with the Church, against which, however, there react until the present day
Separatist peasant movements ; see Mirbt and Ritschl ; also Kalbe: Kirchen und
Sekten der Gegenwart s , 1910. — For the fact that Pietism within the Church
belonged to the aristocracy, the clergy and the official world, and that of the
radical Pietists to the lower classes as a result of the social upheavals of the
wars of religion, see Becker: Zmjendorf, pp. 240-243 ; at any rate, that is the view
of the Count. — For the genuine inner connection of Calvinism with Pietism*
PROTESTANTISM 959
according to which the conventicles do not disturb the Church idea at all,
and its inner opposition to and disturbing effect upon Lutheranism, see the
views of Zinztftdorf: ebd., pp . 246-250 . — For the darker side of the Pietistic
sectarian movement, see Harnack : Alte Bekannte , Aus Wissenschaft und Leben ,
//, 277-288 .— Quite lately I have seen Goters : Vorbereit. d. Piet, in den Nieder-
landen, 1911, obviously a linking-up of the German development with the
Netherlands.
480 (P* 721.) Cf. Ritschl : Gesch . d. Piet., Illy in which, however, the pedantic
treatment of the subject, the derivation of all the “dangerous errors” of the
“theological dilettante”, Zinzendorf, from a “careless” interpretation of the
Lutheran, conception of the Church, is intolerable. In addition to Ritschl ,
the following book is indispensable, Jos. Th. Muller: Z • a ^ s Erneuerer der alten
Bruderkirche, 1900. With regard to the main point, the recognition of the tension
between the mystical supra-ecclesiastical ideal and the sectarian ideal of the
Moravians, Ritschl had, however, quite a right understanding of the case,
and he also rightly recognized the danger for the Church. Cf. also Muller , p. 40:
“Where an approximate historical realization of this conception (of an ‘evident
community of Christ’) is attempted, there the structure which arises out of
it — whether it b^an ‘evident community of Christ* or whatever one may call it —
will always be more capable of realizing the Christian ideal than the popular
and State churches, in the midst of whom it lives. ... At the same time,
howeves, it follows necessarily out of the conception of an ‘evident community
of Christ* that, in a community which has arisen out of an historical situation,
this character cannot remain attached to it as an inalienable possession, nor
can it become a birthright, because every time it depends upon the personal
Christian piety of the members.” It is precisely upon the understanding of this
difference between Church and sect that everything depends. — It is from this
point of view also that we must answer the question which Loofs once put to
me in a letter : Could Lutheranism — under quite other external circumstances
— have produced an ethic exactly similar to that of the Moravian Church? The
question is very instructive, since here the theoretical ethical basis is un-
doubtedly Lutheran both in its spirit and in the letter. We must, however,
remember that the ethic of a sect and of a State Church is still always entirely
different. The sect is very little confused by being drawn into official positions
in the Start, politics, law, or war, and therefore it does not need, like Luther,
to deduce all these things from the Christian Law of Nature and to take them
into the Christian ethic as matters of fundamental importance. The difference
between official and personal morality, which is so important in Lutheranism,
here entirely disappears, and all that remains is personal morality. This personal
morality, however, on account of mutual control, the effects of the smallness
and narrowness of the circle, and the habit of measuring everything by the
standard of the Bible, resulted in a strict morality which fostered a spirit of clear
detachment from the world. Scruples about the oath, official service and war,
similar to those of the Anabaptists, are mentioned by Muller , 27 , 92; Ritschl , III,
244; Approaches to Communism , III, 296; Renunciation of State Law and Arbitration
within the Community , III, 346-348 ; it is the spirit of the Sermon on the Mount,
which Ritschl , however, recognizes to such a limited extent that in all this he
sees nothing but “freaks”. But the ethic of proof and active holiness here play a
much greater part ( Ritschl , III, 398 , 439, 247) than in ecclesiastical Lutheranism,
as Ritschl and Muller both rightly admit. It is certainly quite possible to argue
that the agrarian character of Luther’s economic ethic, and the overwhelming
industrial character of the Moravian ethic, is due solely to external circum-
g6o THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
stances (see Ritschl , III , 347; Muller , 79 am/ #4). This also, however, is connected
with the difference between the free and mobile Church association ( Muller ,
pp . 24-27 , 40) and the State Church. The former is adapted to the mobile
industrial population which at that time was in request by mercantilism,
whereas the State Church had to consider the peasantry which was bound to
the soil and the landed nobility. Also the business enterprise of the community
belongs to the nature of the sect, which must maintain itself, and does not live
on benefices and subsidies from the State. The difference, therefore, is an
essential one, based upon something inward, which, just because of the equality
of the theoretical ethical foundations and because of the brokenness of the
sect-character in the Moravian Church, is most characteristic for the sociological
effect of the sect-type, which is so different from anything that the Church-type
can produce. In addition, cf. Max Weber: Archiv XXI , pp. 50-37. — It has not yet
been clearly established how far Calvinistic business morality may have also
influenced the Moravian ethic in detail ; this question still needs to be studied.
It is, however, significant that the Count likes to take his parables from the
world of business ; speaking of the inwardness with which the treasure of grace
of the Church becomes one’s own possession of the heart, he says: “I will have
fellowship, therefore I must have a treasure, a share in the society, to which I
wish to belong. . . . And where can one find that better than in His immediate
presence?” ( Becker : Zinzendorf^p. 26) ; about the justification of the conventicle
in the Lutheran Church: “What reasonable man would say that if twelve
citizens introduced a merchant company for the furtherance of trade they
ought eo ipso to be separated from all the other citizens and from their country?”
(p. 134). It is also significant that in these words there is a connection with the
non-Lutheran Natural Law of Grotius and Pufendorf (further, in detail, see
Becker, p. 117) ; Spener also had already shown a preference for the Natural
Law of Calvinism. This is connected instinctively with the sect-idea or with
mere religious sociability. The Count also had much sympathy with a man
called Bayle.
461 (p. 724.) Cf. the brilliant presentation of the subject by W. C. H. Lecky:
History of England in the Eighteenth Century, II, 321-642, which is very fair and
impartial ; here also the opposition to culture is emphasized in which, however,
as is always the case in such groups, the purely practical sciences are made an
exception. Otherwise there still exists belief in devils, demons, and witches, in
direct illuminations and miracles, healings, and Divine inspirations, a special
Providence which continually breaks through Nature in favour of believers.
For asceticism, see pp. 383 ff. After Wesley had visited the British Museum he
wrote: “What account will a man give to the Judge of quick and dead for a
life spent in collecting all these?” For the constitution, see the excellent article
by Loofs: “ Meth .”, PRE\ XII, and Nuelsen: “Meth. in Amerika ,> , PRE 8 , XIII;
for the ethic, see the fine section in Schneckenburger : Lehrbegriffe der kleineren prot.
Kirchenparteien , 1863, pp. 103-131, and Max Weber: Archiv XXI, pp. 57-61. —
With reference to Baptism, see Loofs, XII, p. 773 ; in Wesley’s abbreviation of
the Thirty-Nine Articles, baptismal regeneration is set aside ; he does not deal
with “de peccatis post baptismum”, but with “of sin after justification” ;
in Article 15 the statement “Nos reliqui (alongside of Christ), etiam baptisati
et in Christo regenerati, in multis tamen offendimus et, si dixerimus, quia
peccatum non habemus, nos ipos seducimus” is set aside, as Loofs thinks* in
favour of Perfectionism, but also, that which is closely connected with it to the
disadvantage of Infant Baptism. Nuelsen quotes from the Catechism by Nast:
The new birth “does not take place through Baptism, but it is effected by God
PROTESTANTISM 9 6i
at the same time with the justification which is attained by faith” (XIII, 14 ).
Baptism, therefore, is replaced by revival work in classes of children and the
intensive work in the school. Candidates are received first of all for a period of
probation if they reveal an honest desire for salvation, and final admission
into the community is preceded by this first question : “Do ye renew in the
presence of God and of this congregation the solemn vow which is contained
in the Covenant of Baptism?” (XIII, 18). Here, however Baptism is always
eliminated in practice. Schneckenburger , p. 148: “Both sacraments, therefore, fall
more under the conception of commands of Christ to which one must submit.
Therefore, quite logically, one section of the Methodists have developed Baptist
ideas. Amongst American Methodists Infant Baptism has almost entirely
disappeared (?).” — Everywhere the development from the Church-type into
the sect-type is apparent. The Methodists of South America have done away
with the probationary period altogether. XIII, 18: “Baptized children of
Church members are placed on a level with members on probation, and when
they have reached a suitable age to be able to understand the binding character
of religion, and when they can give proof of genuine piety and upon the
recommendation of a leader in whose class they must have been under instruc-
tion for at leas* six months, they can be received into the Church as full
members, while they publicly accept the baptismal covenant in the sight of the
congregation and answer in the affirmative the questions about doctrine and
Church*order. The practice of confirmation is not known in Methodism, yet
the pastors are obliged to divide the baptized children as soon as they are
ten years old into special classes and to instruct them in those truths which are
necessary to make them wise unto salvation” (XIII, p. 19). “In many con-
gregations since the time of a pastor’s ministry (at one station) has been
lengthened, the Class system has been introduced, and instead of individual
classes every Sunday there is a general Class Meeting (testimony meeting) or
the weekly prayer and experience meeting. The testimony meeting of the
youth association has been brought in” ( ebd ., iy). Loofs gives the following
summary ( XII, p. 810) : “At one time people were only received as members
who had been at least two months on probation in a Class. Now the member-
ship in the junior Society Classes counts as a probationary period, which means
that the children of Methodists grow up into the Society just as they do in
State Churches. Human nature being what it is, there must be several amongst
these members who have thus grown up within the Society, who do not fit
spiritually into the Methodist Church. A Methodist National Church is an
impossibility. Methodism will never wholly overcome the difficulties which are
caused by the tension between its growing expansion and its Society character
(which cannot be quite removed from it), unless it ceases to be what it is.” —
Further, it is Loofs in particular who, in his presentation, allows the sectarian
features to remain in the background in a remarkable way; these features are
much more clearly expressed by the Methodist Nuelsen . He desires a similar
awakening for Germany, where, in his opinion, everything is ripe for another
Wesley, and where the movement ought not to be separated from the Church.
Only against such an awakening we must place the fact that the functions
which were at that time exercised by Methodism have among us been taken
over long ago by social democracy, upon whom a message of the type of
Wesley’s would make no impression at all. Loofs also underestimates the
difference in the inner structure when he thinks that it would be possible to
combine a Territorial Church and Methodism. If the Gemeinschaftsbewegung
(Fellowship Movement) among us were to grow to a similar size, then we also
vol. n. kk
962 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
would find it impossible to unite the two types. Such things depend on num-
bers. — For the class limitation of Methodism, see Lecky , 600-602.
484 (P- 7 2 ^.) For Christian Socialism, in addition to the works which have
already been indicated, see those of Theod. Mayer , Ratzinger , Uhlhom , Naumann ,
Gohre , Wenk, von Schulze-Gavemitz , Rauschenbusch , Wemle , Traub, Ragaz , and
Kutter, also the Biography of the Bishop 1/0/1 Ketteler Pfiilf, 1899, and the articles
“Christlich-Sozial” , “ Evangelisch-Sozial” > “ Katholisch-Sozial” , in Schiele* s Lexikon ,
also the essay by Ragaz: “Z ur gegenwdrtigen Umgestaltung des Christentums ”
(Neue Wege , ifaj*/, /pop), and by Liechtenhahn: Die religios-soziale Bewegung in der
Schweiz ( Christl . WW/, /p//), and also the collected addresses of the ifcr/i/i W'or/d
Congress for Free Christianity , Religion , Socialism , published by Schneemelcher,
jqii . — For the fanatical early stages of Marxian Socialism, see Sombart:
Sozialismus und soziale Bewegung 5 , /pop; he rightly emphasizes the strongly
rationalistic and equalitarian element which the religion of the Enlightenment
has brought into this kind of Chiliasm. — The religious social movement in
Switzerland gives the clearest interpretation of the problem of Christian
Socialism, and in it there are revealed most plainly the essentially Christian
motives of this whole group of thinkers. The Evangelisch-soziale Kongress occupies
an intermediate position. The “ Kirchlich-Sozialen** of the Catholic and Lutheran
kind are not Socialists at all. — In a practical judgment of matters we must not
overlook the fact that the real social development approaches rather analogous
mediaeval attempts to solve the problem of the struggle for existence: This is
being illustrated in many ways at the present time.
In any case, it is clear that everywhere individualism is being restricted, and
that soon there will no longer be too much individualism, but too little. As
political tendencies are becoming increasingly Democratic, religion may once
again provide a refuge for individualism. On this point see the excellent book
by Joh . Plenge: Marx und Hegel , 1911 . The book is conceived entirely from the
point of view upon which my own work is based. For the future possibilities of
our social development, see above all, pp. iyQ-182.
445 (p* 7 2 9*) An infinite amount has been written about Tolstoi, but very little
that is good. The article by Johannes Muller: Chr. Welt , /p//, pp. 218-224 , is
excellent : “The new life which Jesus represented and aroused was alien to his
thought. This life which welled up out of invisible depths, filling^ restoring,
creating, the stable and free superiority to all things upon that point outside
the world which lies within us, the divine ‘Yea* to all that exists, the goodness
which at bottom lies in all this, the truth which struggles for life, which sees
the glory shining through and therefore sets God’s seal upon it ; the love, the
outpoured life and the surrender of the soul without choice and without limits,
the reverence and kindness, the wrestling for the immediate experience in the
inmost soul, he knew not.” That is a good word for the Christian ethic, but,
however, the formation of this life in the concrete conditions of existence
remains difficult enough. Muller , for his part, thinks also of a transformation
of the world, and he regards Tolstoi at least as a signpost pointing to the
forgotten radicalism of Christianity: “He opened my eyes to the fact that
Christianity had become conformed to the spirit of this world, while the state-
ment of theologians that it must be secularized in order to become a world-
religion only had the effect of increasing the mistrust which had been aroused.
If only it had remained the way to life which is called a sect** c
444 (P* 73°*) Appeals to Luther’s teaching on the Spirit : in Sebastian Franck:
Ketzerchronih , II, igc/>; Hegler: Geist und Schrift, p . 269; Gottfried Arnold , II, 229:
“It is well known from Luther’s writings that in his earlier works he often
PROTESTANTISM
963
wrote very freely about this grace (the inspiration of the Spirit), indeed, often
his language gave more offence than that of many people who were called
Enthusiasts, and he also referred everything to the Spirit** ; among the Quakers,
Arnold , II, 661, 671 , and 673. — Otto: Anschauung vom hi. Geiste bei Luther , 1898,
also shows the beginnings, only with this exception that seeking opposition to
the “fanatics** in the wrong place he explains Luther himself too much in the
sense of a “Spiritualist**. — For the measure of “Spirituality** in Luther, Zwingli,
Calvin, Capito, Oecolampadius, and Bucer, see the interesting accounts in
Richard GriUzmacher: Wort und Geist , 1902. Luther and Zwingli also regard the
doctrine of predestination in this sense as an expression of the immediacy of
the expeyence. Capito even goes back to the old mystical idea that the inner
illumination is only kindled in the elect through the Divine Spark which
indwells man. Oecolampadius even published writings of Schwenkfeld. Bucer
is absolutely a preacher of the immediacy of the Spirit in connection with
predestination. To the extent in which Luther did not merely co-ordinate the
working of the Spirit with that of the Scriptures, but made this (the Scriptures)
the sole means, the doctrine of predestination retired into the background and
the idea of the Church and the objectivity of salvation came into the fore-
ground. Calvin ^tvoided all this by the idea which he established at the outset
that predestination worked out in the Scriptures, the ministry, and the Church.
— It is plain how much Spirituality of this kind there was among the Reformers.
Therefore these ideas appeared afresh again and again out of the influence of
their writings. Sippell gives a particularly interesting example in W. Dells
Programm. The sermons which I have been able to get at in an edition of Dell’s
works of 181 7( !) reveal everywhere a distinct and conscious affinity with the
“spiritual” elements in Luther. The same is true of the Lutheran Antinomians,
who were the horror of the Puritan Precisians and the men of the jus divinum
in the Church ; see Sippell, pp . 2-4.
470 (p* 733 *) For primitive Christian “Enthusiasm”, see Gunkel: Wirkungen des
hi. Geistes nach der populdren Anschauung der apostol. Zeit und nach der Lehre des
Apostels Paulus 3 , 1909 ; Weinel: Geist und Geister im nachapostol. 1899 ;
Taufe und Abendmahl bei Paulus, 1903 ; for the mysticism of Paul there is very
instructive material in Reitzenstein : Die hellenistischen Mystereinreligionen, 1910 .
From this point of view we can also understand the idea of an opposition
between I%ul and the Christ according to the flesh, which becomes to so great
an extent a starting-point for fantastical conclusions. All mystics after Paul
have also thought like that about dogma. Reitzenstein emphasizes rightly that
there is in Paul also “conflict between the autonomy of religious feeling and the
rigidity of tradition” (p.38) ; the “mystical ideas freed themselves imperceptibly
at the outset from the tradition which had begun to form within the Church
upon Jewish soil, and the struggle which soon followed brought him the con-
sciousness of freedom which for him now is everywhere where the Spirit of the
Lord is** (p. 60). — Also Deissmann: Paulus, 1911 , brings this out without, however,
in this respect sufficiently recognizing the conflict between the primitive com-
munity and the starting-point for all “spiritual” mysticism. The emphasis on
the combination of historical and “spiritual” elements is very apt. P. 134: The
first leads to the sect, the second to spiritualismus.
471 (p* 74 ®*) For this cf. above all Preger: Gesch . d. deutschen Mystik, one of the
grpat classics of Church-history. In different places also there is a great deal of
material in Ritschl and Harnack . Denifie identifies this kind of mysticism with
Scholasticism, and says that he sees no difference between them; this seems to
me very much the point of view of an apologist and does not touch the psycho-
964 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
logical depth of the problem. The reason that Ritschl and his disciples accepted
this statement so eagerly was that in that way they wished to complete the
equation of Catholicism with mysticism, like that of Catholicism, the Anabaptist
movement, the sect, and monasticism. In that way, then, from the standpoint
of the Lutheran Church, mysticism is dismissed. — Further, particularly in
Ritschl' s Geschichte des Pietismus , there are a number of most acute conclusions
based upon detailed study, in which his Churchly instinct displays the essential
anti-ecclesiasticism of mysticism, even in its expressions, which still seem to be
quite in harmony with the Church and with dogma. But even so there can be
no question of any identification with Catholicism. The well-known statement
by Harnack that anyone who is a mystic without becoming a Catholic is a
dilettante, I cannot feel is in any sense right. On the other hand, however, the
equation of mysticism and spiritualismus with the essential idea of Protestantism,
which is the tendency of Weingarten , A. Dorner , Barge , and also Dilthey , is
certainly not right, even though we ought not to depreciate the strongly
“spiritual” element in Luther. It is that element in Luther which the modern
man understands best of all. The Luther monument at Worms bears not in
vain solely “spiritual” sayings. — Very valuable also is the great work by F. von
Hiigel, one of the leaders of so-called Modernism: The Metical Element of
Religion as Studied in St. Catherine of Genoa and Her Friends , London , 1908; this
book gives one such an insight into the wealth of the component parts which
constitute the Christian world of thought as is given in few other works;
in the course of time Christianity has become an entirely complex religion.
478 (P- 740.) For the whole, see above all Gottfried Arnold ', and also Ludwig
Keller: Erbkam; Geschichte d. Pietismus bei Gobel , Heppe , and Ritschl. There is a
good deal in Hegler: Geist und Schrift bei Sebastian Franck , who, on p. 277, tries a
grouping; further, Maronier: Het inwendig word , Amsterdam , 1890 ; Rich. Griitz -
macher : Wort und Geist , 1902 , also the fine treatment of the subject by Dilthey in
Archivf. Gesch. d. Philos. Of ecclesiastical theologians the nearest to this tendency
were Capito and Oecolampadius ; Bucer's relationship to it still needs to be examined.
Cf. also Hegler: Beitrage zur Gesch. d. Mystik in der Reformations zeit, issued by
W. Kohler, 1906; this consists of extracts from writings by members of the
group influenced by Sebastian Franck. In Sippell: Ueber den Ur sprung des
Qudkertums , there are some valuable remarks; a very apt observation about
the difference between Enthusiasm and mysticism, Chr. W., 1916 , p. 460. —
A splendid collective characterization also of this tendency in Gobel , II, 680-
690 , who also sees very clearly the difference between the sectarian Separatist
groups (Labadie and Spener) and the mystical Separatist groups (above all,
Gottfried Arnold).
474 (p* 74^*) Cf. the statement of Ernst Ludwig Gruber , which is quoted in
Gobel , II, p. 681: “The true Separatists do not begin any new sect, neither do
they try to build up that which was broken down, but they retire into the
inward sanctuary, into their heart, wherein they seek to serve God in Christ
Jesus through His mercy, in spirit and in truth, for whose gracious revelation
and appearance in them and without them they then wait with joyful and
believing hope, and, for the rest, they lead a quiet and exemplary life; also, so
far as they have means and opportunity, they try to show all the love they owe
to their own members and to their fellow-men. There is not much to say about
their outward service of God because they have no formed and distinct rules,
habits, and times, but they arrange such in accordance with the daily, hourly,
and momentary impulse of God and the opportunity which is offered to them
with prayer, singing, reading, and the handling of the Divine Word to the
PROTESTANTISM 965
edification of themselves and of others. ” On this point see further the descrip-
tion of the mystical Separatists in II and III ; there the sociological characteristic
of the “Philadelphian period” {III, 71-86), also the “Philadelphian invitation”
G&bely however, only treats the movements of Calvinistic and Lutheran
mystical Separatism in West Germany. The subject is wider than that. Already
in Preger there are all kinds of material of a quite similar kind for mediaeval
mysticism, further material in Hegler's Schrift und Geist. Gobel and Ritschl
describe only the comparatively small Pietistic conventicles in which, owing
to the fact that they were excluded from participation in public affairs, was
diverted into the channels of religious brooding ; these religious Grubelei groups
were sometimes emotional, sometimes very dull, and sometimes overexcited.
Among such people there is no trace of the great ideas of mysticism of the
kind represented by Sebastian Franck, Gastellio, and Goornheert. Only the
latter, however, can be compared with the Church way of thought in greatness
and theoretical acuteness.
476 (p. 748.) Ritschl , who is the harshest and most acute opponent of mysti-
cism, is very instructive upon this point. As he develops his institutional
Church interest in close connection with popular Christianity, he is obliged
to teach that th$ forgiveness of sins is an attribute of the congregation or of the
Church, in which the individual as a member of the Church shares through
Baptism. Corresponding to this he opposes in mysticism nothing so much as
its neglect of both the correlates : objective assurance of the remission of sins
and the Christian community as an institutional Church. No one has recognized
these connections as clearly as he has. Therefore from this point of view he has
based his own ecclesiastical dogma upon the correlation of Christ, the assurance
of the forgiveness of sins and the Church. His teaching, however, is particularly
interesting because he questions the atonement as the basis of the forgiveness
of sins. He is, therefore, obliged to construct this doctrine as the endowment of
the Church, with a certainty based upon the supernatural authority of Christ,
in God’s readiness to forgive sin, and in so doing he comes very close to the
Socinians, amongst whom, however, he misses the correlation with the Church.
Thus it is extremely interesting to read his detailed explanation of the
“Spiritualist” Dippel and £inzendotf {Geschichte des Pietismus , III , 423-433), of
whom the former denies the atonement and the latter maintains it, and both
destroy, of at least weaken, the idea of the Church. Through emphasis on the
Church and her objective assurance of remission of sins, for which it is not the
atonement which is needed but Christ’s guarantee, he resolves the conflict
between the two in a “higher third”.
477 (p. 748.) For this simplification, see Otto: Anschauung Luthers vom hi. Geiste;
also Kant-Friesische Religionsphilosophie , pp. 18-23 > on ^y it is wrong to refer the
corresponding endeavours after simplification of the theology of the Enlighten-
ment to Luther ; it is Pietism and Spiritualismus which this theology here follows.
Luther’s development of the “verbum consummatum ac breve”, out of the
objective means of salvation, of the Word into doctrine, is the unavoidable
result of ecclesiastical theology, which has an absolute external authority and
must have it in the orthodox sense of the conception of the Church, and which
then, naturally, must also develop this authority out to the circumference in
order to leave no obscurities in which fanaticism could establish itself.
4 78 (p. 751.) Cf. my Trennung von Staat und Kirche , pp. 21 ff. The deduction of
a uniform Church system and of intolerance, also of the opposite attitude from
the manner of the conception of truth, seems to me a very important point to
recognize. Yet at that time I did not recognize sufficiently the difference
966 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
between the Baptist movement and Spiritualismus , in ascribing the opposite
position simply to the Anabaptist movement. As the Church is connected with
a definite conception of truth, so also the sect and Spiritualismus are connected
with a definite conception of truth. The sect renounces compulsion and con-
formity, but not the absolute character of the conception of truth ; Spiritualismus
makes it relative in various forms of expression of a truth which is only to be
attained spiritually and inwardly, and which, therefore, can never be finally
and adequately formulated at all.
479 (p* 752.) The relationship between Spiritualismus and the moralist
sectarianism and the Enlightenment, which for orthodox minds like that of
R. Griitzmacher is a natural thing, is also a leading idea of Ritschl, who
absolutely derives the Enlightenment from this disintegration of a sound
Church system. Thus he forms at this point the astonishing equation of
Catholicism, monasticism, sectarianism, mysticism, and Enlightenment, in
which every member at the same time represents the unhealthiness of the other
one, and over against which there only remains RitschVs moderately rationalist
but still essentially positively supernatural Lutheran ecclesiasticism, which is
adapted to a modern popular ethic. Thus, at that time also, following Ritschl ,
W. Bender in Dippel: Der Freigeist aus dem Pietismus , 1882, has described the self-
transformation of mysticism into Enlightenment. These statements, however,
in Ritschl are obviously nothing more than an apologetic for his ecclesiastical
Lutheranism, and Bender's statement is positively false. The change of opinion
into Rationalism which takes place just as much in orthodoxy as it does in
Pietism and in mysticism, must have its reason in something which equally lies
beyond them all ; this is proved by the fact that this same phenomenon occurs
after quite different presuppositions. In orthodoxy the transition takes place
by means of its intellectual, scholastic element, in holiness-Pietism by means of
its moralist element, and in secular and scientific matters by means of its
purely utilitarian, empirical element, in mysticism by means of its idea of a
timeless religious element which is contained in Reason or the soul as such.
In every case, however, the Enlightenment does not arise out of religious
interests, but out of the political and social upheaval, and out of the emancipa-
tion of interests from the leading religious ideas of the past ; this is accompanied
by a completely new, that is, causal natural-science orientated philosophy, and
by a development of new technical possibilities which is connected therewith.
The Enlightenment was the stronger movement, and in all groups it sought the
element which was akin to it at that time ; naturally this is different every time.
The change into Enlightenment on that account never took place naturally
anywhere. In England the change was achieved by the Whig revolution and
prepared for by the Cromwell revolution. The Enlightenment only penetrated
into European life on the Continent as the result of this struggle and of this
victory, and in other countries it never made its way completely without a
struggle. The fight was carried through, above all, by absolute royalty. The fact
that then the new movement everywhere drew out of the old that which was
akin to it is indeed clear. In this sense many Christian ideas — altered — also live
on in the Enlightenment, above all the idea of Natural Law and Natural
Right, which I have studied in its development; see my essay, Das stoisch-
cknstliche Naturrecht und das modeme profane Naturrecht , //.£., 1911, VoL 106.
All the individualism of the Enlightenment is connected with the Christian
subjective tendency which existed apart from the churches, as Plenge: a.a.O .,
brings out very aptly in many places. Its ultimate reason, however, the social
upheaval and the definite rise of the bourgeoisie, is likewise connected with the
PROTESTANTISM 967
previous Protestant development, but with only the ethical social effect, which
was quite unintended, of increasing the commercial bourgeoisie ; on this point,
see Max Weber . — The connection between Deism and the radical parties and
“Spiritual Reformers ,, of the English Revolution has not yet been made
thoroughly clear. In Locke’s principle of toleration it is clear. But Locke’s
theology and also that of Toland suggest the presence of Arminian and Socinian
influences. Among the average Deists the opposition of the Dissenters to the
whole Catholic element is clear, but there is no trace of a merging of mystical
or Pietistical ideas in Rationalism. In Germany, Edelmann and Lorenz
Schmidt, influenced by Spinoza, do not represent a phase of Christian
mysticisnj. — Dilthey also seems to me to overestimate the “rational element”
in the “Universal Theism” of Franck and Coornheert.— The difference between
“spiritual religion” and the rationalistic theology of the Socinians, Arminians,
and the Deists is also quite interesting on its sociological side. These Rationalists
liked to remain within the churches, confining their efforts to introducing
liberal ideas, or else at least they were content if they were tolerated ; the reason
for this was that they realized that in their scientific arguments they possessed
a driving force which was much weaker psychologically, and that they were
only able to reach the intellectual classes ; their own power of forming churches
did not suffice. When they were forced to separate from the churches they
revealed an energy in propaganda and instruction, a scientific instinct for truth
which i§ quite alien to mysticism and “Spiritual” religion in general. It would
be very attractive to study the sociological aspect of the rationalist group-
formations through the centuries down to the free religious group-formations
of the present day. They do not in any way resemble the free mystical groups,
neither have they any similarity with Holiness groups, nor with the Church.
Ritschl, with his extraordinarily acute power of detecting any divergence from
the Church-type, compares this tendency with the school (Rechtf. und Vers.*, /,
pp. 320-323), and he deduces from this characteristic its approximation to the
sect- type, its intellectual propaganda, its lack of emphasis upon worship, and
the frequency of division about opinions on doctrine. The uniting element
is only intellectual agreement combined with all the needs of expansion and
instruction, but also with all the dangers of division and the lack of that com-
prehensive spiritual substance which belongs to the common possession of the
permanent witness of the churches.
480 (P* 753 -) Ritschl* s Geschichte des Pietismus gives a good deal of information
upon this point also. Otherwise it is not possible to generalize on this question.
This is precisely the difference between the “spiritual” ethic and every kind of
ecclesiastical and sectarian ethic. Above all, it is important to recognize that
asceticism has here more of a metaphysical and directly religious meaning than
one of discipline, and just on that account it can also easily develop into
libertinism. In connection with these groups, therefore Weber's, description of
asceticism does not apply at all, unless perhaps owing to its Calvinistic origin
they understood asceticism from the beginning in the Calvinistic sense; an
example of this is Tersteegen, who thought that Zinzcndorf was frivolous. —
Information on ethics also in Hegler : Geist und Schrift, pp. 148-150, 166, 170-184 .
In Franck the social doctrines are essentially the same as those of Luther, only
the spirit of resignation is still more evident. — Reference to the absolute Law
of # Nature, which is here naturally equated with the Divine Seed and the
Divine Spark, with the higher Divine Nature which humanity contains, but
which also agrees with the natural moral consciousness and is identical with
the Decalogue— in Hegler , pp. 209, 243 , 116; the Ten Commandments con-
968 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
tained in the “inner Word” ( pp . 92 ff.). The “Natural Law of love” in the
mystic Sperber ( Ritschl , I, 304) ; likewise Dipped I, 337 ; conscience and Natural
Law, the eternal Word and the supernatural Light ( 7 , 354) , which Ritschl
naturally immediately regards as Illuminism. In Barclay, p. 225, some elders
declare that the Holy Ghost is imparted not only through the Word, but also
through “His handywork in the whole creation, the Law of Nature written
in the hearts of mankind, the light of conscience”. — Saltmarsh, whose Sparkles of
Glory , 1647 , in a Jubilee edition of 1847, has been sent to me by Herr Sippell,
is most interesting. There breaks forth from the degree of Nature, or the Law
of Nature, impelled by its conscious sense of its incapacity to attain an ultimate
value, the law of the Spirit as a higher stage: “The Christian is*one who
should live in an higher region than flesh or nature ; and when God sayth ‘Come
up hither’ he shall live there even in the Spirit with Him ; so as though grace
destroys not nature, yet it perfects and glorifies nature, and leads it out into
higher and more excellent attainements, than it can find in itself. Nature lives
by this law: preserve thyself, thy life, thy lands, thy rights, and privileges,
avenge thyself, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and love only thy
neighbour. Grace lives by this law : deny thyself, forsake lands, life, houses, take
up the cross, if he take thy cloak let him have thy coat also, love thy enemies,
bless them that curse thee.” That reminds us of the Catholic application of the
idea of development, but it is conceived rather differently. Nature, which
finally asserts itself in the competitive struggle and the desire for self-preservation,
becomes an ethic of love directed by God, “disengaged from the love of power,
dominion, riches, earthly glory”. The morality of the New Testament is only
a literal preparatory stage and preparation for this third stage of the ethic of
love, which is to be exercised in the freedom of the Spirit. These are conceptions
of Natural Law and of grace which I have never met anywhere else, and which
contain an element of profound truth.
482 (p- 756-) Cf. the great work by Barge , who, however, takes up a very one-
sided position in favour of Karlstadt for the sake of the political-social position,
which also for Karlstadt lay quite on the circumference. The mysticism of
Karlstadt would certainly have been both unable and unwilling to create
anything permanent in this direction. But Luther’s ruthless attitude towards
the opponents of his idea of the Church is here, however, rightly and instruc-
tively brought out quite clearly. In the official picture of Luther these traits
are usually very much toned down. Also Scheel: Individualismus und Gemein -
schaftsleben Z* Th. R., 1907; R. Griitzmacher , 156-158; Gottfried Arnold, II, 231-239.
483 (P* 758*) Cf. Griitzmacher , Art. Schw. PRE Z , Wort und Geist, pp. 158-173;
Gottfried Arnold, II, 246-261 , who goes into great detail here and does not
disguise his sympathy. Griitzmacher as well as Preger refer to possible in-
fluences of the Bohemian-Moravian Baptists and their theory of the Verbum
substantiate and Verbum grammatical. In any case, from the point of view of
religious psychology his theory is very subtle, see Griitzmacher : Wort und Geist,
p. 165 : “The Scriptures are only an image and a parable of that which was
worked in the hearts of the Prophets through inspiration.” “Whereas one can
neither write nor express with the lips spirit and life, but can only express it in
parable, so must one know how to distinguish as is meet between the Scripture
and the living Word of God (that is, the inward Word), and not give symbols
of that which is rei et veritatis.” “For although God has spoken through His
Spirit with the holy men by whom the Scriptures were written, and gave to
them what they ought to write, this does not mean that He spoke to them
through writing syllables and letters as we would do, but through spirit,
PROTESTANTISM 969
power, and life (which according to their nature cannot be written down in
a book, but only according to a parable or a picture), to which, then, a spiritual
judgment will belong through which the written Word is distinguished from
the living Word of God and the image from the truth.* * “The holy men of
God who were moved to write and to speak by the Holy Ghost were not able
to express and to give to others in tablets of stone and in the Scriptures the
wealth which they had received as they felt it livingly within their hearts.
Scarcely were they able to give any picture of it at all, and with sound voice
or Scripture to witness in the Holy Spirit. The pen was unable to express the
heart entirely on paper, neither could the lips give utterance to that which it
had taste^l of the living fountain, but therefore they have given us their message,
as much as is necessary to us, in parable, and through that means they have
pointed to the one and only Saviour, Fountain, and Light (that is, to the
Christ who reveals Himself within our hearts)”. Several times Schwenkfeld
tried to get into friendly contact with Luther, but always in vain. At the last
attempt Luther gave the messenger a note with the words : “The silly fool who
is possessed by the Devil doesn’t understand anything or know anything of
what he is talking about. . . . And this is my last word : the Lord curse thee,
thou Satan, and thy spirit, and all thy ways and all that belongs to thee”
( Arnold , II, 251). Other orthodox theologians were more just in their opinions :
“He wanted to be neutral, a sceptic, an unusual man.” “He agreed neither
with the Papists nor with the Lutherans, nor with the Sakramentierer [i.e.
Zwinglians and others. — Tr.] nor Anabaptists, but in everysecthe onlyapproves
of something, and he goes off on a new and peculiar form of religion of his
own” {Arnold, II, 242). He himself expresses his views in a similar manner:
“That I now belong to no party or sect as men call them, neither to the
Papists nor to the Lutherans, neither to the Zwinglians, nor to the Baptists on
account of my conscience, has many reasons and this brings to me not a little
persecution. ... I do not try to hide the fact of this separation, and I hold it
as certain that the Christian should go with his heart out of this wicked world
in order that he may again and again direct his heart into the heavenly sphere
where his treasure is, even Jesus Christ” {ibid.). On p. 242 he emphasizes very
clearly the opposition to the popular and National Church, which was becoming
increasingly rigid in its objectivity. In Pennsylvania there are to-day still four
congregations of Schwenkfelders, with 306 members ( Newman , p. 156). — The
newest and the fullest account of the subject is the book by Karl Ecke : Schwenk-
feld, Luther und der Gedanke einer apostolischen Reformation, igu , a very valuable
book. It is written from the standpoint of the Pietistic Fellowship Movement,
and in Schwenkfeld it celebrates the founder of his movement, who, in agree-
ment with Luther’s original ideal of the ecclesiolae, was, however, on the other
hand unable to go with Luther in his tendency towards popular Christianity
and the sacramentalism which was bound up with it (especially p. 103) ; in the
writer’s opinion Schwenkfeld developed Luther’s original idea from the Bible
into a pneumatic charismatic form of fellowship Christianity, and in so doing
he reached the true idea of Christian fellowship. In spite of the most cautious
treatment of Luther, Luther here comes out in a similar light to that in which
he is treated in Barge's Karlstadt. Ecke defends his hero against the charge of
“heretical mysticism” like that of Franck, for example, who “has never scaled
the heights of the Reformation experience of salvation” {p. g6), as against
mysticism and Anabaptism in general in order to explain him purely from
the point of view of primitive Christianity. This, however, is only true in so far
as the Bible itself actually contains elements of sectarianism and of mysticism.
970 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Otherwise, Sippell: K. S. Chr . W., lgn , rightly inserts him once again in the
mystical and sectarian succession as a combination of both. Schwenkfeld’s
judgment about Luther’s treatise Himmlische Propheten, Ecke , p. 80 is worthy
of note: “Would to God that people would look carefully into this little book
with their eyes wide open, looking at Christ our Lord therein and at His
divine truth, and would that they might compare this with the previous writings
of Dr. Martin, and that they might know whither and how far he has now
come, and that they might understand how much misery, instability, and error
are therein and in the future will still be born out of this.” — Very interesting
opinions of Schwenkfeld about the Baptists in Ecke, 204-212 , 8g. So far as ethics
are concerned it is characteristic that Schwenkfeld complains that the J^utheran
merchants did not observe Luther’s ethic at all, but only the forgiveness of sins
and predestination (p. 163). — The influential ideas of the disappearance of the
primitive Church, of the ecclesiastical formalism which has prevailed since
then, of the immanence of an apostolic reformer with Divine credentials, of the
future outpouring of the Spirit and of the End which will then follow; see
Ecke , pp. 227 , 323-334. The Chiliasm of the Anabaptists was of a different kind,
although its basis was the same ; from this point of view also a light falls upon
the question of the emergence of eschatological ideas in Independency and
Pietism. Every attempt to take the question of a Holy Community seriously
for the masses leads to Chiliasm.
4®3a (p 759.) For Weigel, see Griitzmacher : Wort und Geist, pp. 185-igfi; here
Weigel appeals to the younger Luther: “In the books of Luther ye had better
seek; there ye will find even such words as ye have heard from me at this
present in especial in his earlier writings.” His radical subjective theory of
knowledge (“All knowledge comes from the knower”), and the identification
of the psychological religious movement of thought with the thought of the
Logos or of the Divine Nature of Christ in us, has also procured him a place in
histories of philosophy; see J . E. Erdmann: Grundriss , IP, 1878 , pp. 483-488,
and Windelband : Geschichte der neueren Philosophic 3 , I, 483-488. It is genuine
Neo-Platonic mysticism in which its Christian character is only preserved by
the assumption of a positive agreement with the Logos and Christianity.
484 (p. 762.) Cf. the excellent book by Hegler ; Gottfried Arnold, who adopted
Franck’s idea of the Ketzer geschichte, and continued it, and in general is very
close to his position {II, 281-283) ; Dilthey: Archiv V, 38g~400. Dilthey does not
emphasize, in my opinion, the connection with mediaeval mysticism strongly
enough, and he modernizes too much. The relation between his ideas and the
modern philosophy of religion after Lessing, Kant, Schleiermacher, and Hegel,
is indeed evident. In Franck, however, there is no question of the historic
movement of truth; his conception of truth is completely non-historical,
absolute, entirely spiritualized ; he champions a dualism which is hostile to the
world, which excludes a progressive and victorious religious movement, and
is absolutely opposed to modern ethics ; finally, he treats the Scriptures more
along the lines of allegory and occultism than as the history of religion, or
psychologically. His individualism, which dispensed with external forms of
worship, and his mystical idea of immanence, meet with the approval of
modern people, as is shown by the new edition of his Paradoxa, rgio, published
by the Diederich Verlag. Luther took no notice of Franck, who, owing to his
individualism, condemned himself to be ineffective ; only after Franck’s desgh
did Luther thus express himself: “He had not wished to write anything against
such an evil man because he despised him too much ; he was a blasphemer, the
Devil’s own and favourite mouthpiece. ... So far as I can understand and
PROTESTANTISM
97i
judge he is either an Enthusiast or a ‘Geisterer*, who is content with nothing
except ‘Spirit*, ‘Spirit*, ‘Spirit* (‘Geist’, ‘Geist’, ‘Geist*), who has no use for the
Word, the Sacrament or the ministry. . . . He has wandered through all kinds
of filth, and has at last got stifled in it** ( Arnold , 77, 282 ). This was Luther’s
verdict on one of the noblest and freest souls of that period. In Germany he was
soon forgotten, but his influence was felt for some time in the Netherlands.
Arnold could only get hold of his writings with difficulty ! Gf. in addition, also,
Hegler's Programing Sebastian Franck's Lateinische Paraphrase der deutschen Theologie ,
und seine hollandisch erhaltenen Traktate ”, 1901 ; also 77 '. Ziegler: £./. wiss. Theol .,
1907 ; also Hegler's Beitrdge zur Geschichte der Mystik. Herr Sippell will report
about Franck’s writings in England, which he has found in some of the archives
there. It seems to me that a man like Saltmarsh is unintelligible without Franck ;
their ideas are everywhere akin to each other, and at the same time they are
most winning, human, and gracious.
485 (p. 764.) Cf. the excellent book by Buisson: Sebastien Castellion , sa Vie et son
(Euvre, Paris , 1892. For Castellio’s mysticism and spirituality, see 7, 310-314;
77, pp. 38 , 99 , 194-197 , 201-213 , 239. The essence of this toleration with its
“spiritual** basis, which still counts so strongly with the general Christian
atmosphere that from the point of view of toleration it only envisages differences
between Christians, but otherwise takes it as a matter of course that the
“Spiritual Christian truth’’ will propagate itself, see 7, pp. 366 , 373; 77, 38 ,
290 , 29 5. Castellio compares particular dogmas to the small coin which varies
in every country, while he compares the truth of the Spirit with the gold which
is accepted everywhere. Thus we can understand how it came to be later on
that in England and America toleration was only exercised within Christianity
and did not include atheism. This is not illogical, but it is the result of the
“spiritual” argument for toleration. The only difference between this idea of
toleration, with its confidence in the victory of the Spirit, and Luther’s earlier
position is this, that for Castellio the “Spirit”, with its looser and often alle-
gorical relation to the letter of Scripture, is a simpler and less defined principle
than Luther’s idea of the Spirit, which is always combined with the “Word”.
A greater freedom of movement thus arises. But it would be erroneous to
consider this freedom as one which is without restrictions. This enlarged
of toleration, however, is based upon a different conception of
that of the Reformers. The truth lies in the power of the Spirit
which is sealed subjectively in the conscience, whereas all that is external,
literal, ceremonial, and institutional is merely relatively valuable, a veil for the
truth which can only be lifted by the Spirit. Absolute truth is limited to the
spirit ; it is, however, here also clear and inescapable. All that is literal, both
Bible and dogma, on the contrary, belong to the sphere of relative truth. At the
same time this truth is entirely subjective, only to be tested by the individual
in his own experience. It is thus neither the conception of truth of modern
science nor that of the ecclesiastical organ ofsalvation, but it is that of “spiritual”
religion and of mysticism. — We can well understand why his opponents were
so horrified ; in these ideas they beheld the essence of Satanic dangers, “academic
scepticism”, “arrogant fantasy”, the removal of all possibility of a true Church
and a stable authority (77, 23-39, 122, 249, 233, 238). Very characteristic is
Beza*s objection to the idea of trust in the spiritual self-propagation of the
trfith : “What then is the Church to do? She must cry to the Lord, you will say,
and He will hear her. . . . Yea indeed, she will cry to the Lord. . . . But he
who is hungry also cries to the Lord, but at the same time he does not wait
for an angel to bring him something to eat, but the food which another gives
conception
truth from
97a THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
him or that he himself will have acquired by honest and right means, he will
take as from the hand of God” (//, p. 27). Here in reality is the real point at
issue. In this idea of mystical trust in the victory of the Spirit and the relativism
which tolerated various kinds of literalisms, the ideal of the united Church
and self-affirmation in the feverish mass struggles of the time could not possibly
be carried through. Castellio’s weak point, therefore, lies in the lack of clearness
of his conception of the Church. He never thinks at all about the formation of
sects or conventicles, but always about the triumph of the Spirit in a spiritual
way for the whole (II , 57, 230) : “Be content with agreement with the principal
points of religion which are clear and evident in the Holy Scriptures, then
they are at every point in agreement with you.” True Christians, however, are
rare (II, 232) : “Those who thus care about numbers (like Calvin), and for
that reason treat people with compulsion, resemble a fool who, broaching a big
barrel and only finding a little wine therein, fills it up with water in order to
have more, and in so doing he does not increase his wine, and he even spoils
that which was good. For which reason we must not be surprised if to-day the
wine of the Christians is so little and weak since it is mixed with such a lot of
water!” In order to keep the Church pure he considers that it would be
sufficient to exclude people from fellowship without any civil punishment (II,
235) : “These are the right methods of resisting heretics : by words if they use
words, by force if they use force.” All this is still much further removed from
modern ideas of toleration than Buisson thinks.
487 (p. 766.) For the relationship between Castellio and Coornheert, see
Buisson , II, 324 ff. ; for C.’s mystical doctrine, see Heppe: Geschichte des Pietismus
und der Mystik in der reform. Kirche namentl. d. Niederlande , 1879, pp. 80-86. “These
saints are and live in Christ, who is the Light of the world and therefore they
alone can know God. Taught by God Himself, by means of His living Word,
namely, the Logos, and by the Spirit of truth, and led into all truth, and
illuminated by the unction of the Spirit, they need not henceforth that any
man should teach them” (p. 84). “Christ has become Man . . . and has risen
gloriously in order that we through His active obedience in us should in Him
become Divine” (p. 88). An acquaintance also with Franck and Schwenkfeld
is highly probable. Dilthey : Archiv V, 486-493 , brings him too near to Erasmus,
even though he says also that “he went far beyond that which Erasmus con-
sidered it politic to say in his writings” (p. 492). Rachfahl , who in geAeral takes
his cue from Erasmus, with his Dutch liberal ideas, as the supporter of the
Netherlands national spirit, makes him a true disciple of Erasmus (Oranien,
I, 431). This, however, is not true. He is only a Humanist in his acceptance of
the “Natural Law” and in his Stoic character, in which, indeed, he is also at
one with the Reformers, Castellio and Franck. He certainly emphasizes this
underlying element and its identity with the Logos much more strongly. In the
main, however, he is an idealist and a mystic who makes the ladder of sanctifi-
cation from detachment to freedom from sin the centre of his teaching, ascribing
everything to the inward working of God ; see also Busken-Huet, II, 47-36. His
ideas upon the Church I take from extracts which Herr Sippell has collected
and allowed me to see, but the publication of which he has retained for himself.
487a (P* 767.) For the Collegiants in detail see Hylkema: Reformateurs, and
Sippell: Ueber den Ursprung des Quakertums, Chr. W., 1910, pp. 483-487. I likewise
thank Herr Sippell for making known to me the “79 Articles ” and their
“explanation”, which is often mentioned by Hylkema, the publication of which
he has likewise retained for himself. For the connection of the Rynsburger with
the Anabaptists, see Newman: Antipedobaptism, pp. 321 ff. ; for their “inward”
PROTESTANTISM 973
character quite in the manner of Coornheert, see Barclay: The Inner Life , p. go.
For Coornheert and his followers, as representatives of the Inward Word and
companions of Sebastian Franck and Schwenkfeld , see also Maronier , pp. 307— 303;
for the beginnings of the Collegiants, see Barclay , pp. 83-32 , and for their later
development from 1650 onwards, see Hylkema. A biography of Coornheert, or,
at least, an account of his theology, would be very valuable, and would
illuminate his connection with the past and with the future. The prevailing
one-sidedly denominational conception of the history of the Reformation could
thus once again at an important point be restricted.
488 (p. 769.) For this cf. in general Hegler: Geist und Sc hr if t, and Keller : Staupitz .
Keller caljs these idealistic Baptists the “better Baptists”; Maronier does the
same {p. 327) ; others call them “free Baptists”, which is a contradictio in adjecto.
For Bunder lin, see Hegler, p.51; Entf elder Hegler, 273; and Keller, 360. For Thamer ,
see Neander: Th. als Reprdsentant moderner Geistesrichtung , 1842 , and Hochhut:
Zf hist. Theol. , 1861 . Like Sebastian Franck, Coornheert, and the Collegiants,
Denk finally denies all spiritual ministry, even that with which he was entrusted
by the Baptists ; without a supernatural call like that of the Apostles there is no
ministry. This again is Schwenkfeld’s idea, or can it be that in this respect
Schwenkfeld hjmself is going back to an earlier mystical theory? This is
equivalent to the removal of all churches and sects in general, see Keller:
Denk , 1882 , p. 226; in this book his writings are analysed. His so-called
“ Widermf ” is only the reaction from the Baptists to mysticism.
489 (p- 77 °-) P° r the whole subject, cf. Hegler and Gottfried Arnold. For the
“spiritual religion” of Servetus , see Tollin: Servet und d. Bibel , £./«r wiss. Theol.,
1873. For Paracelsus see the fine essay by Eucken in the Beitrdgen zur Einfuhrung
d. Geschichte der Philosophic. For Bohme see in this connection merely Ritschl:
Geschichte des Pietismus , II, 301-303 , and R. Griitzmacher , 133-204. The religious
philosophy and metaphysics of these thinkers do not concern us at this point ;
on this question see the Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophic 3 , by J. E. Erdmann ,
which still to-day is an incomparable book (/, 462-302 ), also Gottfried Arnold.
Here they appear solely in their “spiritual” and mystical effect, which makes
their connection with the historic facts of salvation, upon which churches are
based, superfluous, or makes them mere aids for producing the real, decisive,
quite individual personal process. Ritschl has rightly seen that with the clear
vision of lfete ; for Kepler see likewise Eucken , pp. 38-33 ; here the characteristic
confession of Kepler to an orthodox opponent: “Tibi Deus in naturam venit;
mihi natura ad divinitatem aspirat” {p. 43). His attitude towards the Scriptures
in Deissmann: Kepler und die Bibel , 1834 ; there also the analogy with Sebastian
Franck is emphasized (pp. 28 ff .). — For Amos Comenius , see the article by Schiele
in his Lexikon and the publications of the Comenius gesellschaft , which quite
logically has also taken the other “spiritual” Reformers under its wing, often,
unfortunately, in the uncritical manner of their leader, Ludwig Keller , even
though in so doing he was following a right instinct. For the connection
between asceticism, Spiritualismus , and Pietism, with an empirical pedagogy
and philosophy, see the very illuminating remarks by Max Weber: Archiv XXI ,
pp. 33 and 37.
490 (P- 77 i •) On this point see Gottfried Arnold , to whom he is a favourite
saint, but who was regarded by the orthodox with great hatred as an arch-
hejretic and blasphemer — a sign of the inclination of several branches of
Pietism towards him ; in addition, the exemplary research which works up the
whole subject by Nippold: Zf Hist., 1863 and 1864. Here the discussion between
Joris and Menno Simons (B. 33, pp. 1 41-149, and B. 34, pp. 533 - 557 ) > which
974 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
illuminates in an excellent manner the difference between the sect and
mysticism: the spirit versus the letter, liberty versus law. The three types
(B. 34, p. 554) i where Blesdyk explains : “Some (the sects) have a false con-
fidence in external virtues and they sacrifice everything for a literal faith . .
others (the churches) have a false confidence in a self-chosen form of worship . . .
or in the illusion which they call faith that Christ has died for them and has
become their righteousness and their sanctification. . . . And this false con-
fidence they support and maintain, some with many external works, the others
with talking about and reading the Holy Scriptures, which they declare to the
people according to learned commentaries (but they call it God’s Word), and
with the use of the Lord’s Supper, which they regard as the seal of redemption
and justification.” Over against that Joris, as a newly raised-up prophet,
proclaims the Religion of the Spirit ( p . 354 ). The discussion with Coomheert ,
34, pp. 627-641 , especially p. 633: “Hereby the defender (of David) reproaches
Coornheert, saying that he does not understand what David means (in so far
as C. adheres to his belief in the incorporation of the Spirit in the Bible instead
of in the new prophet), because he confuses it with the views of Franck and
Schwenkfeld with which he himself (C.) agrees. For David does not teach
like these that in the last days no one will teach the other either by word of
mouth or in writing, but he calls the ‘letter’ or the external doctrine that which
is taught by the wise of this world without the spirit. Over against this he
describes that which is spoken by the true ambassador of Christ (that is, by
David himself) through the Holy Ghost in the times of the Holy Ghost or of
perfection, as Spirit and life.” This is borne out by the content. No class
distinctions in this sect ( 34 , p. 373). New editions at the end of the sixteenth
century (B. 34, pp. 566, 627, 667). Reproaches of the Jorist movement against
Knutzen, 1674 (34, p. 672). Arnold’s vindication also testifies to the impression
upon radical Pietism. — For the sect of the Nazarenes, see Kalbe , 273-283.
One of my relations, who belonged to this group, had in his possession all the
mystical literature which was usual, including Gottfried Arnold and the
“Berleburger Bibel”.
491 (p* 773 *) Cf. Gottfried Arnold and Nippold: Z. f. hist. Theol. , 1862. Here,
however, the English development of the group is only treated in a very
meagre way. For the latter see Belfort Bax , 338-380; he connects the Ranters
and the Quakers with them ; see also Barclay: The Inner Life of tLe Religious
Societies of the Commonwealth , 1876, pp. 23-33. No class movement ( Nippold , 370),
recognition of the existing order of Society and external adjustment to existing
conditions, including ecclesiastical (377 ) ; hostility of Coornheert (388 and 336) ;
the ideal ethic in the sense of a libertine mysticism ( 516 ), the origin of
principle of the Holy Community and the system of penitential discipline in
the Baptist movement ( 539-342 ) ; the hierarchical secret organization for
worship, but without apostolic succession or institutional form, merely the
inner calling of the Spirit and the recognition of this calling by an act of
consecration (549-563). It is a peculiar mixture of spiritual mysticism, visionary
Enthusiasm, Catholic hierarchy, and the Baptist Congregational ideal, with,
at the same time, a very strong emphasis upon the perfection and union with
God of the Primitive State which is to be restored in the Third Dispensation.
For this reason Berens connects Winstanley closely with the Familists (pp. 15-18).
— For the Irvingites, see Kalbe , pp. 439-455 . — Further prophetic communities
are the Ubbonites (Heppe, p. 68), others in the two treatises of Nippold.
491 (P* 773 -) Cf. Heppe, pp. 240-374; Ritschl, I, 194-246. The dualism of the
idea : “Mysticism and the idea that the converted can have no fellowship with
PROTESTANTISM 975
the unconverted” ( p . 316). The opposition of the pure mystic, Gichtel, is
characteristic “who could not feel at home within an exclusive sect, because
he himself had no desire to form a sect at all” (ibid., 317) .—Continuance of the
influence of the Labadists upon the Church in the Netherlands (Heppe, 394-
464) : “The Conventicles were the sphere in which usually Pietists, Labadists
and Hattemists met in fellowship” (p. 399) ; in the German Reformed Church
(Heppe, 482 and 489). Thereby the communistic and monastic experiments came
to nothing, but the tendency remained to Separatism, to non-historical
mysticism, to Enthusiasm, to Chiliasm, to Perfectionism, and now and again
also to the uncontrolled sexual tendencies of a Perfectionism of that kind.
For offshoots of this movement in the Philadelphian societies, which include
the so-called “Buttlarsche Rotte” (Separatist movement, led by Eva v.
Buttlar (1670-1717) ), s eeHochhut: Geschichte und Entwickelung der philadelphischen
Sozietdten , £./. hist . Theol., 1863. — For resemblances to and connections with
the Waldensians and the Baptists see Maronier , p. 136; on the journey from
Geneva to Middelburg, Labadie actually took refuge among some Waldensians
in the Palatinate.
494 (P* 774 -) For the intercourse of Spinoza with Collegiants and Mennonites,
see Kuno Fischer, 4 Geschichte d. n. Ph ., I, 163 , 137 ff.; for his relationship with
mysticism, ibid., pp. 133-133, in his correspondence: “For salvation I do not
hold it necessary to know Christ according to the flesh ; quite otherwise, on the
other hand, do I think of that eternal Son of God, namely, of the eternal
Wisdom of God which has revealed itself in all things at its highest in the
human spirit and amongst all men at its highest in Jesus Christ; for without
this Wisdom, which alone teaches how we can differentiate between truih and
error, good and evil, no one can be saved.” That is the doctrine of the “Spiritual
Reformers”. Windelband also points out connections of this kind in his Geschichte
d. n. Ph., I, 213. Hegler , p. 288 , rightly puts the question whether perhaps,
especially in Holland, Spinoza had come into touch with Sebastian Franck.
Also Hylkema: Reformateurs, Haarlem , 1900 and 1902 , places Spinoza in this
connection (II, 367, 473-477) • It is not until we realize this, so it seems to me,
that we understand the religious and ethical side of Spinoza’s thought. Geulinex
belongs undoubtedly also on the religious and ethical side to the same general
group of ideas, as Heppe rightly emphasizes.
«» (p. f ] 6 .) For this new wave of mystical life, see the deeply interesting
book by Hylkema. It is a perfect mine of the characteristic peculiarities of this
kind of “spiritual religion”, and it exhibits in an amazing manner parallels
with the English movement. The name, however, is rather unfortunate, also
the connection between the history of dogma and the earlier mysticism, and the
relationship with the Baptists, is not brought out sufficiently clearly; the
political and social doctrines, as well as the theological ideas of this Spiritual
Reformer, are interpreted too much in the sense of modern rationalistic and
politico-social phenomena. — No class restrictions (/, p. 80; II, 203-208);
a common opposition to the Church and the Baptists (/, 138, 169, 185; II, 7) ;
radical non-ecclesiasticism (I, 100 ff.), opposition also to the ascetic Pietism
within the churches (II, 86 ff., 472) ; equation of the true ethical content of the
“spirit” with conscience and reason (/, 161, 167, 176) ; ethics in relation to the
State ( 7 , 147-178), the inward aspect, see also II, 1-111. The theoretical
independence and remoteness of this religious idea, in relation to all morality
in general, is brought out very well in II, 83-111 ; among the Collegiants the
Calvinist and Puritan characteristics take the lead, in the other movements the
chief features are communistic, sectarian, and democratic. Among the former
976 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
it is very interesting to note how it agrees with the economic features of Ascetic
Protestantism, as they have been described by Max Weber ; van Hoek cries aloud
to his Collegiant brethren : “Vergenoegt u met een seedig gelat en gemoed,
met deftighijd in handel en wandel !” (II, 14). Here also the systematic-rational
element in Calvinistic asceticism, so strongly emphasized by Max Weber, finds
its classic expression (II, 49). “Liever dan er 00k maar de minste ruimte aan
te geven (i.e. to the flesh) wil hij het stelselmatig tyraniseeren. Juist omdat het
vleesch op gemak gestelld is, zal hij sich zetten tot strengen arbeid, etc.” —
Among the real Spiritual Reformers and pure mystics, on the other hand,
this system gives way in order to make place for the liberty of the Spirit.
There is a great difference between the mysticism which recognizes the
Calvinistic ethic of the “calling” and uses it as a means of discipline, and
Quietistic contemplative mysticism. Also fanatical world-reformers have little
to do with the Protestant ethic of the “calling” ; here the prevailing spirit
is that of the radical sect, with its visions of world-renewal.
4#fl (p. 780.) For the whole subject see Hylkema , who throws a good deal of
light upon the connection between Dutch and English spirituality ; in particular
he shows the significance of the influence of the Collegiants on the Seekers and
the Quakers ; further, and above all, Barclay , who presents qn extraordinary
mass of material in a confused and most obscure manner ; his treatment of the
subject, however, carries one completely into the atmosphere of the time, and
reveals on all hands the differences between Independents, Baptists, and pure
mystics, as well as the various developments of these groups, and the way in
which they agreed and disagreed with each other. He rightly sees that the
decisive factor in this situation is the problem of war and non-resistance, in
addition to the need to discern the genuine mystics. — The most instructive
work of Sippell is based upon the material in both these books, and develops
the suggestions which they give ; see Ueber den Ur sprung des Quakertums, Chr. W.,
1910, and Dells Programm. Above all, he has thrown a good deal of light upon
the mystical treatises and their connection with the Collegiants, and thus
indirectly with Coornheert, and he has also followed up the question of the
references to Luther’s earlier “spiritual” congregational ideal. I owe a good
deal to verbal information from Herr Sippell , who has also most kindly placed
at my disposal several rare treatises of that period which were in his possession.
Thus I have learnt to know DelVs Sermons and Dell's Select Works , London, 1773,
and the wonderful little mystical treatise by Saltmarsh , entitled Sparkles of Glory,
London, 1847 , as well as Eaton's Honey-Combe. It is only through these treatises
that one can understand the period. For Dell, see the interesting work by
Sippell ; Sippell appears, however, to me at any rate, to undervalue the relation
with Congregationalism, which itself contained mystical elements and to
estimate too highly the connection with Luther. Dell’s doctrine, however, is
in reality Congregationalism transformed into “spiritual” mysticism, which
further accepts the purely technical support of the ecclesiastical system by the
State, as was obvious under Cromwell ; in this connection we can also think
of Schwenkfeld, as Sippell himself has remarked recently (Chr. W., 1911 , p. 966).
We may also state as a fact that there took place among the essentially
Calvinistic Puritan Independents a development from originally pure dogmatic
Calvinism to the Enthusiastic Independents under the influence of Baptists
and Spiritual Reformers ; above all, under the influence of the excitement and
agitation of the period (Barclay, pp. 1 50-159). This, however, is not pure
mysticism; cf. the passage which Barclay quotes from C. H. Spurgeon : “It
happened that the Puritans were getting into the sere and yellow leafe; and
PROTESTANTISM 977
the Independents and Baptists and others sects who were at times thoroughly
and even remarkably spiritual, were growing worldly, political and vain-
glorious. They had the opportunity of grasping the carnal sword, and they
embraced this opportunity; and from that very moment very many of them
lost the spirituality for which they had been eminent. The danger was lest the
Evangelical sects should quietly settle down into one State Church . . . and
preach each one after his fashion. ... At that very moment God sent into the
world George Fox. ... He stood up in the face of the Christian world, and
said to it, ‘No, thou shalt not do this. Thou shalt not conform thyself to the
world. Thou shalt not go into an unholy alliance with the State ; there shall
be in the midst of thee a spiritual people who shall bear their protest that
Christ’s kingdom is not of this world, and that religion standeth not in forms
and ceremonies, but is a matter connected with the inner man, and is the
work of God’s Spirit in the heart.” This shows the whole difference between
“spiritual religion” and the spirit which has just been described above of the
Baptists, Hussites, Huguenots, and Calvinists, who approved of war for the
establishment of the establishment of the Kingdom of Christ. The same
difference is seen in the observation of Barclay on p. 623: “The Christianity of
Cromwell’s soldiers at the commencement of our civil wars cannot be doubted,
but it is more than doubtful whether it improved in quality by the conflict.
They had, however, seen enough of war to be apt disciples of Fox, and many
of thenj became preachers of the Gospel of peace and goodwill to men.” — For
the English followers of Boehme, see Barclay , p. 214 ; for the Seekers and their
connection with the Collegiants, pp. 73 and 410-41 3 ; for the Ranters, pp. 414-
428 ; Barclay thinks that they owe their origin to the “Libertins” of Calvin’s
time, and to the mediaeval “Brethren of the Free Spirit”, whereas to me this
seems a mere resemblance which can be explained by the fact that they have
a common basis. — The spiritual course of many souls is reflected in this report
about Salmon’s treatise ( p . 428, I): “First he became a Presbyterian; they
appeared to him to hover gently and soar sweetly in a more sublime region
than the Episcopal people. Then came Independency on the stage, a people
far exceeding others in the strictness of their form. Then the doctrine of
Believers’ Baptisme. He became a Baptist preacher, braved persecution, and
built a tabernacle. Then came that voice from the throne of the Almighty:
‘Arise an^ depart, for this is not your rest.* ” — See also the account in Firth:
Cromwell's Army . Here “spiritual” religion penetrated through lay-preaching,
and through the substitution of “spiritual” chaplains like Dell, Saltmarsh,
Sedgwick, and Hugh Peters for the Presbyterian chaplains, who withdrew
(p. 320). The gradual elimination from the Army (p. 340): “a sober Con-
gregationalisme became the dominant form of religion.” Cromwell interprets
the coming Kingdom of God in a spiritual sense, in contrast to the Fifth
Monarchy men, and therefore he desires to allow existing outward institutions
to continue ( p . 341). Monk complains that these “spiritual” men arc very little
use in the Army ( pp . 344 ff .) ; “spiritually minded” officers cashiered (34^ ff-)-
Here is a description of a Captain Jackson : “In the language of the time he
was one of those who had passed through all forms, and was above all forms
and above all ordinances, whose religion was not made up of laws and duties,
but all exaltation and inward bliss. For such, he said, all external forms of
duties and performances are turned into praises and thanksgivings. Now there
is nothing but mirth in them, there is a continual singing of birds in them,
chirping sweetly, in a sweet harmony of soul-ravishing delightful music.” He
was under the thumb of a Presbyterian colonel, but he was very useful as a
VOL. II. LL
978 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
military man, for which cause Fairfax did not wish to sacrifice him. That even
in this Cromwell would not let things go too far, and punished those who held
Socinian or Antinomian theories, as “derogation to the honour of God” is
shown in the case of a Captain Coveil (347 ff .). — In this whole connection
Sippell ascribes a very restricted influence to the Familists ( p . 2) ; he thinks that
the “enthusiasm” and mysticism come from the eschatological tendency of
Puritanism ( pp . 5-/0). However, in Everard, Dell, and Saltmarsh the whole
mystical, “spiritual”, literary tradition is undeniably in the background
(Sippell, pp . 80-88).
497 (p* 784*) On this subject see especially Barclay , who gives information on
the most important particulars; obviously, however, he wishes to give the
impression that Quakerism is a voluntary Church of a Pietist and Scriptural
kind. See also Weingarteriy who traces its descent from the Anabaptists, and
Sippell , who ascribes its origin to the mystics, and also the Journal of George Fox
(German translation, 1910), with the beautiful introduction by Wernle, who
emphasizes chiefly the fact that the Quakers take the Sermon on the Mount as
an ideal which is meant to be actually realized in life. In my opinion the whole
question of the character of Quakerism is only intelligible when we take the
following points into account : (a) that primitive Quakerism, with its emphasis
upon inwardness and its “enthusiasm” was entirely unorganized and lacking
in support ; ( b ) that it only achieved organization when it began to follow the
example of the community organization of the Baptists ; (c) that this oiganiza-
tion, once it had been completed, led the Society inevitably into a closer com-
promise with the world, until (d) the Society attained the Puritan morality of
the “calling” and an almost ecclesiastical form of Church-order and tradition.
Quakerism is a synthesis of mysticism and the Baptist movement (which was
finally urged into close contact with the Puritan outlook), which from the
beginning it had rejected so resolutely. — This is the main result of Barclay’s
study in accordance with which he tones down its mystical and enthusiastic
origin. The connection with the constitution of the Mennonites ( p . 247) : “Does
not this clearly show the way in which the doctrine of the Light, associated
with the doctrines and practices of the Mennonites, passed into England and
found a powerful and active exponent in George Fox?” The abiding difference
( p . 243) : “In Friesland he, a Quaker missionary, says, that they (the Baptists)
hung exceedingly on their outward visible things, so that I am confident it was
as easy for the Apostle taking the sect of the Pharisees off from circumcision,
offerings, temple, and the traditions of the elders, as it is for us to bring these
people away from their external celebration of the ordinances called Baptism
and the Lord’s Supper.” The connection with the Mennonites and Collegiants
especially (pp. 352-338). — Tension between both elements was, therefore, not
lacking (pp. 431 ff.). The difficult problem of the establishment of the member-
ship on the basis of the assumptions of mysticism (pp. 353-366) , likewise the
appointment of the minister and the teaching elders as the recognition of a
spiritual endowment by the community (p. 445). The solution of the problem
of “infallibility”, that is, of the decisive authority which determines questions
of membership and position, is the Spirit in whom one must trust (p. 446) :
“None ought nor can be accounted to the Church of Christ but such as are
in a measure sanctified or sanctifying by the grace of God and led by His
Spirit ; nor get any made officers in the Church but by the grace of God apd
inward revelation of this Spirit.” It was in the impossibility of solving this
problem that Luther’s idea of small groups of pure Christians proved imprac-
ticable. Among the Quakers, however, this interpretation of the leading of the
PROTESTANTISM m
Spirit was interpreted along two lines: (a) it led to the idea of birthright-
membership, that is, to the supposition that the children of Quakers will
become filled with the Spirit, and that, therefore, they must be educated as far
as possible on very intensive religious lines; ( b ) so far as officials were con-
cerned, the guidance of the Spirit came through the vote of the majority, who
chose and controlled their own officers. This constitutes the process of seculariza-
tion, which Barclay laments from time to time {pp. 527 and 362) .—The accept-
ance of the Puritan ethic of the “calling”, supervision of the community by the
laity, who interfere in every detail of business and family life (pp. 490-501) ;
here we find the supervision of labour and wages conditions, strict avoidance
of all kipds of luxury, exclusion of mendicancy, and the impossibility of finding
a poor man in the community. The only standard for activity is usefulness ;
in one group the members are forbidden to plant flowers ; that is a luxury,
instead of flowers they are to plant potatoes and turnips. Here also the economic
results are described in which he agrees with Weber: Archiv XXI> pp. 61-72 , and
especially Bernstein , pp. 680-685.— For the Quaker State in Pennsylvania, see
the extremely interesting book by Sharpless: A Quaker Experiment in Government ,
Philadelphia , 1902. — Barclay complains of the numerical decline within the
Society, and attributes it to lack of propaganda and laxity in excluding unworthy
members, and to marriage with non-Quakers. The reason for that decline,
however, is inherent in the sociological principle of the Society, which can
only expand widely in times of religious awakening. A gain in numbers from
a natural increase in population is only experienced within the churches, who,
through Infant Baptism, increase along with the population, and who are able
to combine their standards with a religion for the masses. I met with similar
complaints among Unitarians and Gongregationalists when I was in America.
With such principles this is inevitable, and it can only be avoided by an
approximation to Church principles, which, indeed, the birthright membership
of the Quakers really is (see Barclay y p. 362). — For the policy of the Quakers in
questions of poor relief, provision of employment, etc., and for the effect of the
removal of poverty within a small circle, but aloofness from the working classes
and the tendency of the Society to become bourgeois, see Barclay , pp. 157-521 ,
and Bernstein , 683. — On Bellers, see the highly interesting information given by
Bernstein, pp. 694-718. It is the radical Christian Baptist element in Quakerism,
which isjhere expressed, combined with a Puritan emphasis upon work. The
book bears the characteristic motto: “Industry brings plenty. The sluggard
shall be cloathed with rags. He that will not work shall not eat.”
499 (p. 788.) For the Unio mystica, see the pertinent remarks in Hupfeld: Ethik
Gerhards, pp. 204-232 ; for Arnd, see Lasch: Arnds Wahres Christentum , Monatsschrift
J. Pastoraltheologie, 1909 ; a good deal in Gob el, who loves to trace mysticism so
long as it remained within the Church ; for further books, consult the literature
mentioned in connection with Pietism. Ritschl understood very well the
difference between “indifferentism” and the “sect” and the peculiarity of their
way of forming fellowship. With his usual charity he calls this kind of thing
a “clique” (//, pp. 359-362; /, 475 , 483) ; he sees in the spiritual leaders of the
Friends of God an imitation of the Catholic director, in mysticism the ultimate
cause of the martial Jesuit order, or a luxury which is due to the fact that there
are “enough people who think like that (like Tersteegen) some of them
weavers whose imaginative powers and devoutness were no help to their
mechanical work, partly rich people who did not need to work, partly women,
especially unmarried women, who always have the time and the capacity for
mystical contemplation” (/, 478) ! According to his idea, such people ought to
980 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
be in a convent, and the whole doctrine simply comes from the cloister. In
contrast with this, however, he can endure the ascetic sects : “For Separatism
betrays a secret attachment to a confessional Church the more ardently it
fights against the impurity of the same, at least to the extent that it assumes
the necessity for a particular Church formation at all” (/, 483). This is a
complete misunderstanding! — For the attitude to the State and to Society,
see Gottfried Arnold and Dip pel, II, 313 and 327, also Gob el, II, 638-735, and
III , 166-133. DippeVs treatment of the subject has some Quietistic features, but
in reality its whole spirit is not monastic as Ritschl seems to think, nor is it
due to Thomas Aquinas, but it is genuinely Lutheran. He recommends agri-
culture and farming, considers work a kind of asceticism and a ipeans of
self-support, as well as the love of one’s neighbour, treats private property as
the result of the Fall, etc. He has, however, an aversion to official work under
the State, a tendency which we see in Luther so far as individuals were con-
cerned, but not with reference to official position, and he objects to a profes-
sional ministry, which, of course, for Luther would have been quite impossible.
Gottfried Arnold accepts the existing situation in the genuine Lutheran sense,
just as Sebastian Franck accepted it in his day. In II, p. 365, he says, very truly :
“The practice of-the early Anabaptists and of the English Baptists differed
from that of the Separatists in Germany to the extent in which their piety
was not bound up with any political claims or any tendency to social reform.
Their complete detachment from the world, and their quite individual tendency
towards self-denial, which often led to Quietism, made them feel that the thing
to be most desired was the isolation of each individual.” This description,
however, only fits the mystics ; among ascetic Pietists and Church reformers
the reasons for such a passivity were different, and Ritschl has not gone into
them further. Those reasons were the impossibility of any social reform from
the point of view of German Lutheran Absolutism, and the acceptance of the
ethic of the “calling” from the Calvinists, which from the very outset was
bourgeois and conservative. — For Christian Thomasius , see Ritschl, II, 552, and
R. Kayser : Christian Thomasius und der Pietismus, 1300. — If we speak of radical
Pietism we must then distinguish between the ascetic sectarian wing and the
mystical indifferentist wing; in Lutheranism the latter has been decidedly
more important and influential than the former, whereas, on the other hand,
within Calvinism the former has been most important down to the prs^ent day,
and from this source receives ever fresh reserves of energy and fresh impulses
for progressive movement. For mysticism in the Calvinistic Church, see above,
pp. 774-763 ; also Heppe, p. 70; Ritschl, I, 122-130 ; Max Weber: Archiv XXI,
p. 44 . In the study of Dutch and English mysticism outside the churches we
have already shown its connection with the mystical elements in the Baptist
movement and the early spirituality of the period of the Reformation. — For the
reappearance of mediaeval mystical literature there are numerous instances in
Ritschl, also Keller: Reformation, pp. 470 ff. Very interesting also is Hegler:
Sebastian Francks lateinische Paraphrase der deutschen Theologie, 1301 , p. 16: “In
the orthodox period the estimate of the Theologia Germanica was keener among
the Calvinists than among the Lutherans.” — The different attitude of mystics
and “spiritual” men towards practical ethics, that is, the lack of contact with
Calvinistic rational asceticism and the ethic of the “calling” in favour of a more
passive suffering and non-theoretical attitude towards the world, has oft«n
been suggested by Ritschl and Max Weber (Archiv XXI, 41), but it has not been
traced to its real reason, which lies in the fact that the fundamental doctrines
and sociological quality of mysticism are different. Here, then, there is no
PROTESTANTISM
981
systematic utilitarianism, and the main impression is one of spontaneity in
response to moods, feelings, and passing impressions. But just because of that
fact they again come nearer to Lutheranism, from which they only differ in
ethics by a stronger theoretical rejection of the flesh. But here, indeed, Luther’s
followers for their part were also very uncertain.
600 (p. 790.) Cf. Plitt: Zinzendorfs Theologie , 1869 /.; Becker: Zinzendorf und
sein Christentum im Verhdltnis zum kirchl. und religidsen Leben seiner Z e ^> 1900,
Ritschl is also very acute in his analysis; he considers that the Count was
originally attracted to the spirit of Philadelphianism and “indifferentism” in
the sense in which Arnold uses it, and that he only approached sectarian ideas
througlf the influence of the Moravians. This expression of opinion has been
questioned by Becker ( Studd '. u. Kritt ., 1891 ), since he points out that Zinzendorf
always remained a Lutheran. Ritschl , however, is right in the main because the
Lutheranism in question was supra-ecclesiastical and interconfessional in
character, that is, it is Lutheran Christ-mysticism and an ethic of feeling, and
the difference between that and Lutheranism in the ecclesiastical sense was
only not realized by the Count. In this matter he was amazingly naive and
non-reflective. Mystical features in Ritschl , Illy 407, 384, above all in Becker,
76-82, 249-262. His misgivings about the Moravians refer to their sectarian
character, “their tendency to separatism, to form themselves into harmful
sects if they had only something external to show for it” ; “that was an Italian
Waldensian false spirit” (words of Zinzendorf in Muller, 100 ff.). He himself
explains clearly why from his personal mysticism he came to see the need for
membership in a community: “The Moravian constitution had to take place;
otherwise we would have had to invent some other form. For at bottom it is
a fanatical idea to say, What have we to do with sects? With human organiza-
tions? We want to be a Church of Jesus Christ. But what kind of a Church then?
The invisible Church? Then you would have to become hermits once again.
The visible Church? Then know that there is no visible Church without a
definite religious form” ( Muller , 99). These words are highly illuminating as
showing the difference between the sect-type and mysticism and idealism.
This fact also explains his opposition to the Church discipline which the
Moravians wished to introduce, and to the development of their religious body
into a state within the State; see Becker, 225-232. — For the aesthetic indi-
vidualism, which was due to this outlook and very little to the voluntary
character of the movement, see the interesting sketch by Sam. Eck: Ueber die
Herkunft des Individualitatsgedankens bei Schleiermacher, Giessen, 1908. For the
transformation of Spener’s conventicles into free religious “sociability”, as
something which is due to the social nature of man and therefore also justified
in religion, as well as on the other hand the development of conventicles into
free associations, which are intended to fertilize the territorial churches by
concentrating an inward and spiritual Christianity round their chosen leaders,
see Becker, 163-178; 153: “The Zinzendorf Brotherhood has nothing to do with
that which is usually described as Church development, but it is solely a
religious movement within the popular churches which organizes itself into
free groups and associations.” Zinzendorf himself seems to have held this point
of view: “In the opinion of Zinzendorf the future belongs to the free religious
association which is founded solely upon Christ crucified, and whose only aim
is to exalt Him, and therefore desires to serve the popular churches from this
point of view which is its sole standard.”
602 (p* 79 2 *) I* k impossible to illustrate this question in detail. A certain
amount can be found in Keller: Reformation, 483-488; the monthly review of the
982 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Comenius Society studies this question unceasingly from Keller’s point of view ;
see also Troeltsch: Das Historische in Kants Religionsphilosophie , 1904. Similarly
Kronenberg: Geschichte des deutschen Ideal ismus, /, 1909 , makes the statement that
German Idealism signifies the breaking through of Christian mysticism “into
the universal human”. His treatment of Hamann and Jacobi is very fine.
The fact that he practically identifies Christianity, mysticism, Protestantism,
Romanticism, Platonism, and that he argues that the spiritual conflict is due
to the original opposition of this tendency to Enlightenment, Rationalism,
Scholasticism, Ecclesiasticism, is very little help in making clear what is right
in his assertion of mystical and spiritual influences upon German Idealism. —
The criticism of J. Plenge is very instructive because he entirely negiects the
sociological point of view ; see his Realistische Glossen zu einer Gesch . d. deutschen
Idealismus , Archiv fur Sozialwissenschaft , XXXII , 1-35: “Critical subjectivism
experiences a brief period of critical brilliance, supported by the social optimism
of a bourgeoisie which has attained its freedom. ... It seems to have been an
anticipation (that is, in face of the task of a renewal of Society in connection
with the religious idea) which was only possible through the specific develop-
ment of the problem of Reason which had grown up within the sphere of
Christian subjectivism” (p. 34). — For the very interesting and influential
Lavater , see the excellent studies by von Schulthess-Rechberg and Heinrich Maier in
J. C. Lavater , 1902 , as well as my Anzeige HZ, 93 . — On the whole subject see
Sell: Die Religion unserer Klassiker f 1904. Even to-day the best treatment of the
subject is that of Gelzer: Die deutsche poetische Literatur seit Klopstock und Lessing ,
1846. Sell , p. 775, expresses it excellently when he says that the common
element in the classic writers consists in this : “It is the conviction of the com-
plete relativity of all that is offered as revelation, with a complete recognition
of that whence all revelations come and of that which it receives : of God and
the soul.” Goethe is, upon the whole, not unchristian, but absolutely outside
the churches. “This Pietism (of Lavater and others) could and must interest
Goethe because it was a form of personal religion invented by oneself, not a
religion based upon authority or mere custom or because of submission to any
kind of authority” (p. 176 ). “According to that, Goethe (apart from the central
period of his life, when his whole attention was directed to antiquity) was a
man who was self-taught and followed the Bible in his own way, a believer who
only obeyed the witness of his own conscience” (p. 189). Goethe’s exjfiession is
instructive : “There is the standpoint of a kind of religion, that of pure Nature
and Reason, which is of Divine origin. This will eternally remain the same,
it will endure and be of value so long as Divinely endowed beings exist. It is,
however, only for chosen souls, for it is much too exalted ever to become
general” (p. 206) ; that is not meant in the rationalistic sense ; Goethe’s intention
was something spiritual, with the inclusion of Nature in the revelation of the
spirit of the All. The well-known word about Christ : “If I am asked whether
it is in my nature to yield to Him in reverent worship I answer, Certainly.
I prostrate myself before Him as the divine revelation of the highest principle
of morality” is likewise quite in the meaning of mystical idealism, excepting
that God at the same time similarly reveals Himself powerfully in other realities,
as, for example, in the Son as the most favoured revelation of the generative
principle ; “the worship of Christ is only a conditional recognition of something
which he has experienced of Him” (p. 190). Very significant is the religions
education in the pedagogical period of the years of travel, because it outlines a
peculiar form of worship which corresponds to these ideas ; further, it is quite
different from that of the churches and reveals the sense of need to give to the
PROTESTANTISM
983
new conception of Christianity also a form of worship and a community for
instruction and education ; it is the idea of an educational system and a form
of worship which is to be freely entrusted to various groups.— To this connection
belong Bjornson and Ibsen, who both started from the Pietism of their family.
Ibsen's idea of the Third Era is the same as the Evangelium aetemum of Lessing,
the three stages of the mystics, or the threefold Gospel, and it can be traced right
back to Joachim of Fiori ; see also Weinel: Ibsen , Bjornson, Nietzsche , igo8 . —
The whole subject deserves to be made a subject of independent research.
504 (P» 795 -) On this point see the works of Dilthey and Haym. The anti-
ecclesiastical element in Schleiermacher' s Reden can only be held to be an esoteric
expression if we misunderstand the sermons preached at the same time;
Ritschl has rightly felt this ; see Schl? s Reden und ihre Nachwirkungen auf die evangel .
Kirche in Deutschland, 1874; see also Troeltsch: Schl. und die Kirche (Schl., der
Philosoph des Glaubens, igio). — No one has seen better than Kierkegaard the
aesthetic and immanential character of Romantic religion as well as its radical
individualism ; Kierkegaard rejects the aestheticism and the theories of im-
manence, whereas he lays great stress upon radical individualism. — The
completion of this individualism by a Romantic tendency, which copies the
Catholic Church, as for instance in Novalis, is shown by Paul de Lagarde in
his German writings, which, in spite of many fads, belong to the most important
studies that have ever been written about the modern religious situation; he
thinks that the whole situation means the break-up of the previous churches
and the preparation for a new religion through a Gospel renewed from before
the time of Paul and an ethically deepened spirituality. — A. Bonus: Die Kirche
(Aus die Gesellschaft, hsg. v. Buber, XXVI) is very characteristic in its complete
loss of the idea of the Church, and it is distinctive for countless people who are
thinking along those lines. — Influential groups like that of Johannes Muller at
Schloss Mainburg reveal the character of an ethical mysticism : awakening of
the Divine Seed in man through Christ to a free personal development from
the Spirit which is one with Christ, but which goes far beyond the letter;
the incarnation of man by obedience to natural laws of the personal life,
revealed and made known by Christ, is nothing other than the spiritual
doctrine of the awakening of the Divine Spark in contact with Christ — all,
however, removed into the sphere of activity. This group is also typical in its
oppositidh to the Church and the sociological character of its spirituality;
see Muller's Bergpredigt (turned into contemporary German, 1906). — The con-
ception of Christianity, which Eucken describes as the necessary development of
the same, is “spiritual" ; see Konnen wir noch Christen sein, 1911, p. 190 : “We are
then in line with the movement of world history if we demand a further
changing of the visible into the invisible, and if we desire to see a still clearer
distinction drawn between genuine reality and that which can be touched by
the senses. Therefore, we are not departing from our contact with Christianity,
the religion of the Spirit, if we regard the happenings of the spiritual life as
the only thing that matters and which ought to be treated accordingly."
P. 200: “Religious fellowship must take its stand upon the truths . . . which
belong immediately to the life process, which do not come first of all out of
metaphysical speculation or out of historical tradition, truths, that is, which
represent and are related to the facts of the appearance of a new world in
nflan and the further formation of this world through struggle and conflict,
the facts of a fundamental fighting and victorious spirituality."-— A very
original form of mysticism which is indifferent to Christianity has been
developed by Maeterlinck, whose influence upon the present day can likewise
984 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
be interpreted from this homogeneity ; see The Treasure of the Humble . Mysticism
develops in a deliberately anti-Christian sense under pessimistic influences in
Schopenhauer and Ed, v. Hartmann , and is still more hostile in character in their
disciples Arthur Drews and von Schnehen. Here, by the extinction of the whole
theistic and personalistic element, all desire to form a community and every
form of worship falls away completely, and the central point of the Christian
cultus, Jesus Christ, is set aside altogether ; all the same these religious philoso-
phers believe that they are able to revive a declining religion by this kind of
religion of the immanence of the individual spirit within the All, apart from
all fellowship, practice of worship, and basis in history. — Highly characteristic
also is Simmel: Das Problem der religidsen Lage (in the collection Weltanschauung ,
Philosophic und Religion , 1911)9 who conceives religion as something entirely
neutral without any definite content or stimulus, and therefore he excludes all
connection with worship or with history. — Modern mystical lyrics, like those
of R. M. Rilke , also belong to this tendency, and similarly the religious tendency
of the Diederich Verlag and the whole modern claim to be not irreligious but
apart from the churches, as well as many other things of the same kind.
50to (P- 797*) It 1S not uninteresting to classify contemporary Protestant
theology from this point of view. Present-day orthodoxy has a st^pngly Pietistic
element mingled with a strong emphasis upon the inward life ; but since in the
inward experience of the spirit it always considers, above all, that the Bible,
the Sacrament, and the Church constitute the supernatural agent ’of the
immediate experience, it retains a sufficient amount of objectivity, authority,
an external standard and miracle in order to be able to think and work as a
Church ; from this point of view the Virgin Birth and the Resurrection are
interpreted from the standpoint of inward experience; it is ecclesiastically
“potent”. — Schleiermacher and his disciples are essentially “spiritual” in their
outlook; but he reacted from this “spirituality” to a modernized form of
Christ-mysticism, and in so doing he retains a Christian form of worship and
a canon of doctrine which are to some extent conceivable, the recognition of
redemption through the supernatural impression of the personality of Christ
as united to God ; in accordance with this he would maintain the Church and
a community for worship, while he would give up the very individual arrange-
ments of the Christian life-substance which is clothed in the form of the popular
Church ; from this point of view a stable ecclesiasticism in the old &nse will
never be attained. — The followers of Hegel went in the same direction, in so far
as they wished to remove religion from pure intellectualism and a mere party
and scholastic connection; or they made the “principle” of the Spirit entirely
independent, in contrast with the “Person” of Christ, and in so doing they
only retained for the Church the spiritual fellowship which was entirely
anonymous. — Ritschl and his genuine followers reduced the body of doctrine
in a peculiar way, but they demanded for it a strictly authoritative ecclesiastical
value, and for that very reason they laid great emphasis upon the Church,
and drove mystical spirituality out of every hole and corner; Ritschl was
triumphant when he could prove to his orthodox opponents their Pietistic
modifications of the conception of the Church, showing them that he was more
ecclesiastical than they. His doctrine, therefore, is completely planned to fit
the possibility of a popular and Territorial Church. — Herrmann maintains a
Christ-mysticism similar to that of Zinzendorf and Schleiermacher, whidi
asserts a kernel of certainty given from without, which guarantees confidence,
and is thus a redeeming revelation, but otherwise everything is left to personal
conscientious conviction; therefore, from the side of the Church he believes
PROTESTANTISM
985
in Luther’s confidence in the supernatural proclamation of Christ which itself
effects conversion, which needs no other artificial aids, and is able to carry
itself out by its own power ; the consequences of this position for Church-order
have been deduced by Rudolph Sohm and Erich Forster ; this would lead in
practice to Congregationalism, within which all that matters is faith and
trust in God; in this case there would be nothing to fear from any anti-
ecclesiastical influence. The so-called Religious Historical School goes back
entirely to “spiritual” religion, and is, therefore, ecclesiastically “impotent”.
My own theology is certainly “spiritual”, but for that very reason it seeks to
make room for the historical element, and for the ritual and sociological factor
which is £>ound up with it. Naturally I am aware of the difficulties of such an
undertaking. — Harnack (see especially his remarks about the World Congress for
Free Christianity , Aus Wissenschaft und Lehen , 1911, /, 146-152) considers that a
theoretical solution of the problem is altogether impracticable, and he only
wishes to see an intelligent tolerant form of Church government, which would
leave the pastors freedom of movement ; this really means the destruction of
the Church as a system, and it would be preserved solely by the exclusion of
very “advanced” pastors; the limits within which their “advanced” views
might be toler^cd could only be determined by the verdict of some committee,
acting according to the best of its knowledge, taking the general personality
into account ; this, then, might form a bridge to happier forms of organization
later on: a conception which thoroughly corresponds with the mingling of
spirituality and historicity in his theology (sec ibid., Christus als Erloser, pp. 81 -
94). From that point of view also we must interpret a work like that of General-
superintendent Kaftan: Wo stehen wir? Einekirchliche ^eitbetrachtwig, 191 r .H^ exalts
the ecclesiastical “potency” of the orthodox, and casts up at the Liberals their
ecclesiastical “impotence” which he says is due to the features which lay most
stress upon “spirituality”. In order to save the Church he would banish the
“subjective” members from it. The characterization is not false. Still we must
draw attention to the fact that qualities are essentially bound up with “ecclesi-
astical potency”, which ethically are very hard to bear, and that the qualities
which go with “spiritual impotence” are qualities which correspond to
gentleness, goodness, and inwardness of Christianity. This presents, in fact, the
sociological antimony between the claims of organization and those of the
development of a free personality. Mutatis mutandis the political parties are in
a similar position, with the exception that they do not theoretically serve the
formation of the personality. If, however, the matter really were so, another
way than that of Kaftan would be desirable, for if his way were followed the
Church would be saved at a very great cost, and it would alienate spiritually
minded men everywhere. — There are some fine remarks upon the whole
subject in SeWs article Die zweifache Theologie , Ch. W. , 1911 ; see also my memorial
speech, Richard Rothe , 1899. Rothe only preserved himself from the ultimate
consequences of pure “spirituality” through his Christology, but even in this
he comes very close to theosophy ; here he reminds us of Schwenkfeld, Para-
celsus, Bohme, Octinger, and Arnd. — For the whole see also the book which
has already been mentioned by Bruhn.
505 (p* 798*) Pertinent remarks upon this tendency in Novalis and in the
French Romanticism in Windelband: Die Philosophie im deutschen Geislesleben des
199 Jahrhunderts , 1909 , pp. 32-36; for St. Simon see Lorenz Stein: Sozialismus und
Kommunismus. Herder, in his time at Buckeburg, had tendencies of that kind.
To what a limited extent, however, such tendencies arise out of the real spirit
of Romanticism is proved by present-day Neo-Romanticism, which renews
986 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the old aesthetic, differentiating spirit, and which has again entirely cast off
the positive historical tendency, possibly only in order to experience a similar
transformation.
508 (p. 802.) For further details, see Ritschl and Gabel. The Geschichte der
Ethik , by Luthardt , II, 248-340, and Gass, II, 1 , pp. 283-325, and 359-368, shed
practically no light upon this subject. Dippel has written a work on social
ethics entitled: Christenstadt auf Erden ohne gewohnlichen Lehr -, Wehr-, und
Nahr stand oder kwrze dock eigentliche Abbildung der aits dem Reiche der Natur entstan -
denen und im Z°m Gottes bestdtigten Ordnungen unter den Menschenkindern . Extracts in
Walch: Religionsstreitigkeiten, pp. 723/. and 753 /. The existing social order of
Natural Law belongs only to the economy of the Law or of the Father. —
Saltmarsh, in his Sparkles of Glory, expresses similar ideas. A completely new
order of humanity is to arise which will be entirely free from legalism moving
only in the spirit of love and idealism, but in itself becoming a real organism
through love. Until that time comes Christians are to live apart from the
world in quietness and humility. — Sebastian Franck tolerates the existing
situation in the sense of the Lutheran Natural Law with a great deal of emphasis
on resignation and a pessimistic view of humanity ( Hegler , pp. 260-263 , 243,
116, 179-184) ; Schmoller and Wiskemann are also in sympatljy with Fraqck
to a certain extent. — Gottfried Arnold also is conservative in his attitude
towards the present day, but idealistic and revolutionary with regard to the
future, so far as this problem is concerned ( Ritschl , II, 311 , 315 ). Winstanley
and Lilburn, on the other hand, expect the renewal of Society in the demo-
cratic and communistic sense through the Spirit, and they work consciously
though without violence towards this goal. — The sex ethic and the permission
of woman to preach should be noted, for this in itself constitutes the removal
of ecclesiastical and especially of Lutheran patriarchalism. Otherwise, the
finer conception of sex ethics does not appear until we come to the modern
spiritual idealists, who combine the religious idea of personality with an
aesthetic-immanent conception of Nature. On this point Schleiermacher's Letters
on Schlegel's Lucinde are characteristic ; see Rade: Stellung des Christentums zum
Geschlechtsleben, pp. 61-89, in which, however, the whole question is connected
too closely with Luther instead of with the tendency in mysticism and spiritual
idealism to emphasize the subjective side of personality. Schleiermacher’s ideas
are entirely non-Lutheran. — The fine works on sex ethics by Lhotzky&Das Buch
der Ehe, 1911 , and Johannes Muller: Beruf und Stellung der Frau , 191 J, also belong
to this school of thought. It represents entirely non-ecclesiastical sex ethics.
Johannes Muller is particularly characteristic of the modern spiritual, idealist
ethic ; his attitude is not quietistic but energetic and resolute, aiming at the new
creation of humanity through the awakening of the “original being” or Divine
Spark, latent in every soul, which is wakened by the impression of Jesus and
which creates a spirit leading to free personal development. It is a spiritualized
Chiliasm. This teaching naturally exerts its highest influence on purely personal
relationships and therefore affects sex relationships. Muller's Bergpredigt,
translated into ordinary German in 1906, contains, however, some very
vague and impossible idealistic ideas of reform in the State, economics, and
Society, which do not even remotely do justice to the complicated condition
of the actual life of Society.
810 (p. 809.) At this point my presentation of the subject converges wkh
the well-known researches of Max Weber on Der Geist des Kapitalismus , etc.
( The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism , translated by Talcott Parsons,
George Allen & Unwin, 1930, 10s. 6d. net). Weber's researches start from
PROTESTANTISM
987
the endeavour to discover the constitution of modern capitalism, with its
emphasis upon trade and its bourgeois character as distinguished from the
capitalism of the ancient world and of the later period of the Middle Ages.
On the basis of practical observation in Westphalia and the Lower Rhine, in
Scotland, England, and America, he represents one of the constituent factors
as Ascetic Protestantism, whose nature Weber analyses with a view to under-
standing its significance in economic history, or better still in the history of
civilization. My study has a different aim. It only intends to give a clear
presentation of the Protestant social ethic for its own sake. I therefore set aside
Weber’s further references. On this point I was able to follow his presentation
of Ascetic Protestantism precisely because every time I studied this subject
afresh I felt that his argument had proved itself to be a brilliantly acute piece
of observation and analysis. — For the rest, however — as I would like to take
this opportunity to remark — my researches do not start from those of Weber.
Externally they were caused by the task with which I was entrusted, of
reviewing (for the Archiv) the book by Nathusius: Die Mitarbeit der Kirche an der
Losung der sozialen Frage ( The Co-operation of the Church in the Solution of the Social
Question). When I was engaged in this task I found that there were no books in
existence whicfy could serve as a basis for the study of such a question, and I
then began to try to lay the foundation for such a study myself. This book was
the result of my endeavour. When I began this work, however, I found that all
the interests of my research contributed to it: the sociological phenomena
connected with the conception and nature of the Church, which were based on
the familiar doctrine of Rothe (see Religion und Kirche , Preuss. Jahrbb ., i8gf) y
interests which concern the history of the Christian ethic (see Grundprobleme der
christlichen Ethik , Z- f Th. u . K., 1902), and, above all, my researches into the
meaning of the Lex Naturae (they run through a whole number of treatises
from my Melancthon und Gerhard onwards). Finally the book embodied the
programme which in 1901 I outlined in my review of Seeberg's Lehrbuch der
Dogmengeschichte , Gott. Gel. Anzz 1902, pp. 21-30. Weber’s work, however, did
not appear until 1903. Without Weber certainly, I should have been unable to
gain a clearer conception of Ascetic Protestantism than that which had already
been prepared by Schneckenburger and Ritschl. Indeed, we only need to study
the works of both these eminent, acute, and extremely learned men in order to
arrive at Chis conception. Weber’s own important discovery is the setting of this
conception within the whole framework of universal, economic history and
history of civilization ; at the same time also we must not overlook the psycho-
logical penetration of his dogmatic-ethical analyses. They are based upon
penetrating studies of Baxter, Spener, Bailey, Sedgwick, Hoornbeck, and the
works of the Puritan divines, London, 1845-1848.
411 (p. 810.) Cf. Weber: Archiv XXI , p. 79 f “A sober procreation of children”
is the aim, according to Baxter ; Spener has similar ideas, with concessions to
the coarse Lutheran view. . . . According to an idea prevalent in many
Pietistic circles, the highest form of Christian marriage is that which preserves
virginity ; the next best is that in which sexual intercourse serves the purpose
exclusively of the procreation of children, and so on, down to those which are
entered upon for purely erotic reasons, or for external convenience, which
from the ethical point of view may be regarded as concubinage. In all this,
thft marriages which are contracted at a lower level, and those which are
contracted for external reasons, are preferred to those which are based on
eroticism (because the former are based on rational considerations). The theory
and practice of the Moravians may here be left out of account.” Thus Whitfield
988 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
expresses himself in an offer of marriage : “I bless God, if I know anything of
my own heart, I am free from that foolish passion which the world calls love. . . .
I trust I love you only for God, and desire to be joined to you only by His
commands and for His sake’* ( Lecky , II, p. 5 8g ). Further, Weber, p. ?gf . : “As in
that rational interpretation of sex relationships among nations which have been
influenced by Puritanism, there grew up, finally, that refinement of spirit and
ethical penetration of marriage relationships and the delicate blossoms of
married chivalry — in contrast to that boorish patriarchal spirit which among
us is often present, even in the circles of the Geistesaristokratie — this does not need
to be developed further here ; the protection of the freedom of conscience of
woman and the extension of the idea of the priesthood of all believers 4 to include
her were also, by including this question, the first breaches in the patriarchal
ideas. In the Th. JB., ign , W. Kohler calls attention to a paper by Ellen A .
MacArthur in the Ecclesiastical History Review, 24, pp. 6g8-yog, on the subject
“Women’s Petition to the Long Parliament” ; on this he remarks : “Why did
women come to the fore just then when the Puritan rule and Quakerism were
about to emerge? From what circles do they come? What are their motives?
The Calvinistic influence is quite clear.” Parliament certainly answers : “Good
women, we entreat you to repaire to your houses and turncj your petitions
into prayers at home for us.” For the reasons of the position of woman in
America see Bryce, II, 742: “The cause is the usage of the Gongregationalist,
Presbyterian, and Baptist Churches, by which a woman who is a member of
the congregation has the same rights in choosing a deacon, elder, or pastor as
a man has.” — For the often emphasized tendency of Ascetic Protestantism
towards an extended system of popular education without philosophy and
academic theology, but combined with Scriptural instruction and realistic
technical education, see also Dell's Education Programme in Sippell, 63-71, whose
similarity with that of the Quakers and Pietists Sippell also emphasizes. He
desires a strict discipline of youth, general elementary education, as many
high schools as possible, but no scholastic, theological, philosophical, and
privileged universities : “Especially the mathematical sciences must be highly
honoured at the universities such as arithmetic, geometry, geography, and the
like which do not have evil results, and are also very useful for human society
and the various needs of this present life.”
511a (p. 812.) The illustrations of this point are scattered througWfche whole
of this book ; of special importance also is the study by Tocqueville and Kuyper .
There is also a certain amount of material in Bryce, II, 617-834 ; characteristically
he is fond of comparing American piety with that of Scotland and the English
Nonconformists. On the State in //,/). 701 he says : “The State is not to them as
to Germans or Frenchmen and even to some English thinkers an ideal moral
power, charged with the duty of forming the characters and guiding the lives
of its subjects. It is more like a commercial company, or perhaps a huge
municipality, created for the management of certain business in which all who
reside within its bounds are interested. That an organization of this kind
should trouble itself, otherwise than as a matter of police, with the opinions or
conduct of its members, would be as unnatural as for a railway company to
enquire how many of the shareholders were total abstainers.” — Cf. also Veit:
Englische und deutsche Frommigkeit, Ch. W., igo6.
612 (p. 815.) I am here giving again an outline of Weber's ideas on *the
capitalist relations of Calvin and the sects, although I have already indicated
it above. Here alone have we reached the point at which it can be fully intro-
duced, because in this respect the matter of importance is not so much Calvinism
PROTESTANTISM
989
as Puritan, Pictistic, ascetic Calvinism, and its agreement with the sects.
Rachfahl has not noticed this, although Weber has emphasized it clearly enough,
and his study includes a large number of sects. — One example of the question,
purely from the latter point of view, is the description of Quakerism in Wein-
garten , 397-405, The characteristic expression of Rentmeister Gottes (The Lord’s
Stewards) is used in Heppe , 188 , and also in LodensteyrCs Meditation on “ Die
Darbringung der zeitlichen Giiter eines Christen an ihren Eigentiimer y \ In the form of
a conversation with God, in this Meditation he makes the Christian hand over
quite formally all his possessions to God, whose steward he desires to be. —
For further study of this subject, see Weber and also the anticipatory statements
above (pp> 709-723 ). I believe, however, that through my presentation of the
sects, and especially in the clear distinction between mysticism and the sect-
type, I have in some particulars made Weber f s idea clearer, and also that
through the manifestation of the sectarian elements in primitive Calvinism
I have made the fusion of Calvinism with the sect-type more intelligible. —
In my opinion Sombart's brilliant book, Die Juden und das Wirtschaftsleben , does
not weaken the force of Weber’s argument at all. Above all, it justifies the whole
formulation of the problem as the search for the origin of the “capitalist
spirjt”, which supports the “capitalist system”, which is the absolutely necessary
presupposition for its modern mass-form, and is anything but easy to under-
stand. Further, it shows one of the component parts of the modern capitalistic
spirit, which is always recognized and emphasized by Weber, but which in that
connection was not to be further analysed. Above all, however, through
Sombart's researches that tendency of the capitalistic spirit, with which Weber
was most concerned, is not touched upon — a tendency which is still more
important for the understanding of modern civilization, the tendency, that is,
which is directed towards bourgeois mass capitalism, with its modern idea of
professions and specialists. The bourgeois spirit of modern civilization had to
be explained in relation to the treatment of Capitalism, which had always been
working from the time of antiquity, and was not specifically bourgeois and in
relation to the technical, political, and colonial stimuli. Further, see above,
p. 720. For the rest, I repeat, that in all this I have no intention of making a
contribution to the history of Capitalism ; this I must leave to the experts in
this very difficult sphere. All that I have to do here is to interpret the social
teaching of Protestantism, alongside of which everything which belongs other-
wise to the history of Capitalism can here remain untouched.
615 (p. 818.) On this point cf. the various statements in Max Weber , whose
interests are concerned precisely with this problem. He has formulated thus
the programme of research (p. 109) : “The task is . . ., to show the significance
of ascetic rationalism (that is, of Ascetic Protestantism with its utilitarian
character which systematizes labour), for the content of the social-economic
ethic, that is, for the kind of organization showing the development and function
of social groups through their varying forms from the conventicle up to the
State. Also, its connection with Humanistic Rationalism and its life-ideals and
cultural influences, with the further development of philosophical scientific
empiricism, with the technical development and the spiritual values of civiliza-
tion, must be analysed. Then, finally, its historical growth must be followed
through the different stages — from the early mediaeval beginnings of an
asceticism within the world to its disintegration in pure utilitarianism, and
through the particular spheres in which ascetic religiosity has been widespread.
Only when this has been done will the significance for civilization of Ascetic
Protestantism, in relation to other plastic elements of modern civilization,
990 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
emerge.” The programme is very difficult to carry out as long as the history of
Humanism, of humanistic culture, and of the classes which it affected, as well
as the history of modern philosophy in its social aspects, has not been made
perfectly clear. Both in the works of specialists, as well as in those of Church
historians until the present time, this subject has never been fully cleared up.
The history of technical developments, which in no way coincides with that
of the natural sciences, would also need to be clearly presented. Weber’s
programme is thus, in my opinion, not yet possible to realize, but the idea is
very stimulating, like other suggestions of Plenge : a.a.O . Such a programme of
the history of civilization is particularly instructive as contrasted with Lam-
precht, who, with quite other methods, is aiming at a similar scientific goal of
knowledge. Lamprecht’s methods are based upon “psychological” laws, which
enable him from the outset to prescribe the order of facts in definite series,
whereas my own method is essentially directed towards the analysis of the
concrete particular situation with reference to its content and its special
causal relations, which are only'conncctcd with this concrete situation. To this
extent also in this work I would like to show the contrast between my method
and that of Lamprecht, who tries to reach an extremely valuable goal of
knowledge by impossible methods. — I am in entire agreement with J:he
methodical reflections about the connection between the history of Christianity,
and the history of civilization which Harnack has developed in his lecture
Ueber das Verhdltnis der Kirchengeschichte zur Universalgeschichte , A us Wissenschaft
und Lebeti , //, 41-62. Only I believe that in this work I have shown that the
religious development reveals a firmer and more independent attitude,
especially in relation to political constitutional developments, than Harnack
thinks.
CONCLUSION
Developments in Christian Social Doctrine
since the Eighteenth Century
Our inquiry is over. It was only possible to treat it exhaustively
as far as the eighteenth century. The developments which have
taken place from that period down to the present day could
merely be suggested. With the nineteenth century Church History
entered upon a new phase of existence. As a result of the dis-
solution of the unity of civilization controlled by a State Church,
combined with the development of the independence of modern
thought, it has since then no longer possessed a fixed and ob-
jective ideal of unity. The result has been that the social philo-
sophy of the Christian community has also suffered an undeniable
disintegration, through its dependence upon continually changing
conditions. 'Jhese groups are living in a new world, the world
of modern bourgeois capitalist society and of bureaucratic
militaristic states. The relation between Church and State has
been weakened, and in some cases entirely severed. Social theory
has developed out of a naive preoccupation with antiquity, the
Bible, and theology into an independent science, which examines
entirely afresh the relation between the land and the population,
the connection between the economic substructure and the
spiritual superstructure, and the sociological laws and conditions
which govern the growth of fellowship ; this social theory has far
outdistanced the social philosophy of the Church.
Above all, the modern bourgeoisie, the Law of Nature, the
emancipation of the fourth estate, and, finally, scientific rational-
ism have created a new sociological fundamental theory of
rationalistic individualism, which is connected, it is true, with
the older ideas of Christian individualism, but which in its
optimistic and equalitarian spirit is sharply opposed to it. The
repercussions caused by this atomistic and essentially indivi-
dualistic democratic spirit (which is plain even within Com-
munism and Socialism) were only partly determined by the
social philosophy of the Church ; they are due also to the biolo-
gical spirit of natural science or to the organic spirit of Platonism ;
both are in sharp opposition to the leading ideas of Christian
social philosophy. Further, the actual practical restrictions of
modem individualism, the neutralization of the competitive
stouggle, which had been unleashed for two hundred years by
bourgeois individualism, and allowed to spread throughout the
world, is likely to become an effect of purely economic and
992 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
political conditions of power, in which the division of the product
spheres and the influence of the producers bring assured
quotas ; and, when these spheres are fixed, both the mobility of
the population and the production of offspring will be com-
pressed within fixed limits. Radical individualism will probably
soon be an interlude between an old and a new civilization of
constraint. This individualism may be compared with the process
of taking the materials of a house which has been pulled down,
sorting them out into the actual individual stones, out of which
a new house will be built. What the new house will look like,
and what possibilities it will provide for the development of
Christian ethics and of Christian social philosophy, no one can
at present tell. Christian social philosophy will bring to the task
both its common sense and its metaphysical individualism; but
it will have to share the labour with other builders, and like
them it will be restricted by the peculiarities of the ground apd
of the material.
Under these circumstances it is impossible to give a description
of the present situation, and to deduce from it principles for the
future. Even if the undertaking were restricted to a mere descrip-
tion of the different Christian endeavours, schemes, and associa-
tions of the present day, the whole situation is so complicated
that the subject would have to be treated in a separate work.
In order to conclude this survey, therefore, it is not necessary to
deal further with the present situation ; all that is required is to
collect and formulate the results of this inquiry in some brief
general statements.
Our inquiry began with the social and ethical tasks and
possibilities of Christianity at the present day. It then reverted
to the point at which the form in which the social development
of the religious idea was expressed, severed its connection with
the secular social formations. It discovered that these connections
take very different forms, according to the special conception of
the Christian idea, and of the organization which corresponds
to this conception. Our inquiry then traced the course of de-
velopment of the different church and group formations, and of
the social ethic which corresponded in each case to this develop-
ment. It was finally confronted with the fact that all these social
developments were determined by the general conditions of
civilization, and in every instance the question had to be asked :
At any given time, what was the relationship between the two
forms of influence, and how did they mutually react upon one
another? Thus we find that the results of this inquiry are
CONCLUSION
993
connected with the whole conception of the nature and history
of Christianity in general. In the following paragraphs these
results are briefly summarized.
RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY
Three Types of Christian Thought
(i) It has become clear how little the Gospel and the Primitive
Church" shaped the religious community itself from a uniform
point of view. The Gospel of Jesus was a free personal piety,
with a strong impulse towards profound intimacy and spiritual
fellowship and communion, but without any tendency towards
the organization of a cult, or towards the creation of a religious
community. Only when faith in Jesus, the Risen and Exalted
Lord, became the central point of worship in a new religious
community did the necessity for organization arise. From the
very beginning there appeared the three main types of the socio-
logical development of Christian thought : the Church, the sect,
and mysticism.
The Church is an institution which has been endowed with
grace and salvation as the result of the work of Redemption;
it is able to receive the masses, and to adjust itself to the world,
because, to a certain extent, it can afford to ignore the need for
subjective holiness for the sake of the objective treasures of grace
and of redemption.
The sect is a voluntary society, composed of strict and definite
Christian believers bound to each other by the fact that all have
experienced “the new birth”. These “believers” live apart from
the world, are limited to small groups, emphasize the law instead
of grace, and in varying degrees within their own circle set up
the Christian order, based on love ; all this is done in preparation
for and expectation of the coming Kingdom of God.
Mysticism means that the world of ideas which had hardened
into formal worship and doctrine is transformed into a purely
personal and inward experience; this leads to the formation of
groups on a purely personal basis, with no permanent form,
which alsp tend to weaken the significance of forms of worship,
doctrine, and the historical element.
From the beginning these three forms were foreshadowed, and
ali down the centuries to the present day, wherever religion is
dominant, they still appear alongside of one another, while
among themselves they are strangely and variously interwoven
VOL. II. MM
904 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
and interconnected. The churches alone have the power to stir
the masses in any real and lasting way. When mass movements
take place the sects draw closer to the churches. Mysticism has
an affinity with the autonomy of science, and it forms a refuge
for the religious life of the cultured classes; in sections of the
population which are untouched by science it leads to extrava-
gant and emotional forms of piety, but in spite of that it forms
a welcome complement to the Church and the Sects.
Christian Thought dependent
on Sociological Factors
(2) The results of this survey throw light upon the dependence
of the whole Christian world of thought and dogma on the
fundamental sociological conditions, on the idea of fellowship
which was dominant at any given time. The only peculiarly
primitive Christian dogma, the dogma of the Divinity of Christ,
first arose out of the worship of Christ, and this again developed
out of the fact that the new spiritual community felt the necessity
for meeting together. The worship of Christ constitutes the" centre
of the Christian organization, and it creates Christian dogma.
Since the God whom the Christians worship is not to be regarded
as another god of the Mysteries in the polytheistic sense, but
represents the redeeming revelation of the monotheistic God of
the Prophets, the dogma of Christ develops into the doctrine of
the Trinity. All the ideas which have been borrowed from
philosophy and mythology are only used as a means of expressing
ideas which have grown up out of the inner necessity of this
Christian community for worship. Within the spheres of the
Church, the Sects and Mysticism, however, this doctrine of
Christ is interpreted very differently.
The Christ of the Church is the Redeemer, who in His work
of salvation has achieved Redemption, once for all; working
marvellously through the ministry, the Word, and the sacraments
in the Church, He imparts to individuals the benefits of His
Saving Work.
The Christ of the sect is the Lord, the example and lawgiver
of Divine authority and dignity, who allows His elect to pass
through contempt and misery on their earthly pilgrimage, but
who will complete the real work of Redemption at His Return,
when He will establish the Kingdom of God.
The Christ of mysticism is an inward spiritual principle, felt
in every stirring of religious feeling, present in every influence
of the Divine “Seed” and the Divine “Spark”; this mystical
CONCLUSION
995
Christ was Divinely incarnate in the Christ of History, but He
can only be recognized and affirmed in inward spiritual ex-
perience; this principle therefore agrees in general with the
“hidden ground” of the Divine life in man.
The same course of development can be traced in other doc-
trines. As the Christ-dogma absorbed into itself Jesus’s original
message of the Kingdom of God, so also the various transforma-
tions of the Christ-dogma determined the fate of this second
fundamental Christian doctrine. The Church is the Kingdom of
Christ, and is therefore identical with the Kingdom of God in
the world, or at any rate it is the method by which it is con-
tinually produced afresh. In the sect Jesus is still the Herald of
the Kingdom of God which He ushers in Himself; the sect is
inclined to Chiliasm. In mysticism the dominion of Christ means
the dominion of the Divine Spirit, from this point of view there-
fore the Kingdom of God is only within us.
The doctrine of Redemption undergoes an analogous process
of development. From the viewpoint of the Church the work of
Redemption was finished by the Atoning Death of Christ; this
“finished work” endows the Church with the power to transmit
remission of sins and sanctification. The sect believes that real
redemption lies in the Advent of Christ and the establishment
of the Kingdom ; the whole previous process of history was a
mere preparation for this consummation. In mysticism redemp-
tion is conceived as a process which is continually being repeated ;
it culminates in the union of the soul with God ; in this experience
Christ only serves as a quickening impulse or a symbol. In actual
life, of course, these different types mingle and combine with
each otjjer, just as the different types of the Christian fellowship
also mingle and combine. But this abstract analysis makes the
history of dogma much clearer and simpler. This system of doc-
trine is neither a development of the Christian idea of God along
the lines of Immanence, nor an amalgamation of the mythology of
the ancient “mysteries” with speculative philosophy, nor an accu-
mulation of ecclesiastical doctrinal definitions, nor an immediate
expression of the Christian attitude towards life at any particular
time. The religious doctrine was the expression of the religious
vitality and development of thought which was focused first of
all in the cultus, and then radiated forth from it again, so far
as for this purpose ideas were necessary at all. Philosophical and
purely dogmatic considerations were quite secondary. No one
had ever felt the need for a dialectical interpretation of the
instinctive conception of the idea of God itself which lay behind
996 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
the cultus, and behind the idea of fellowship, which prevailed
at any particular time. Individual ideas were simply linked
together and classified. The real religious fundamental idea itself
lay in the unconscious, and it was also embedded in the in-
stinctive idea of fellowship and cultus which belonged to that
conception. It was, of course, only natural that individual thinkers
should ponder deeply upon these questions, and that, from the
viewpoint both of theology and of the philosophy of religion, that
they should attempt to search into the depths of her Qhristian
knowledge of God; but so long as they remained attached
to any kind of fellowship, even they found that the sociological
character of the ideal of fellowship, which was vaguely defined
in their minds, affected and limited their ideas on dogma.
On the other hand, an essentially dogmatic criticism also
involves a shifting of emphasis in the fundamental sociological
sense. This, however, throws a great deal of light up<m the nature
and the destiny of theology, on the scientific elaboration of
Christian thought.
The theology of Catholicism — which represents the essentially
ritual and sacramental development of Christian thought — is the
formulated fixation and insertion of the depositum fidei of the
institution of Redemption into the framework of the idealistic
development of the metaphysic of late antiquity.
The theology of Protestantism — with its principle of the Church
which spiritualizes public worship and the Sacrament — made the
purified doctrine into an intellectual system, which, however,
retains its connection with the sermon in public worship, and
with the authoritative basis of grace and doctrine ; in consequence
it oscillates between a system of ideas which are valid \n them-
selves, and a group of dogmas based on history and supported
by miracles, an uncertainty which has only been increased by
the influence of modern science.
The sect, which belongs essentially to the lower classes, and
which therefore does not need to come to terms with thought
in general, goes back to the pre-Church and pre-scientific stand-
point, and has no theology at all ; it possesses only a strict ethic,
a living Mythos, and a passionate hope for the future.
“Spiritual Religion” alone conceives Christian piety as a living
creative movement of the present day, and as a factor in the
universal movement of religious consciousness in general. Hence
it alone has produced a truly scientific theology, a real religi&is
philosophy, based upon universals, and with a hope of real
development before it. Hence of all Christian systems of thought
CONCLUSION
997
it alone has been taken over and developed by the great thinkers
of modern Idealism. Since, however, it arose out of the failure
of the real ecclesiastical spirit, it finds it difficult to establish
satisfactory relations with the churches, and with the conditions
of a stable and permanent organization. This accounts for the
difficult problem of the relation between Christianity and the
modern cultured classes of the present day.
Conception of Truth,
and tiIe Idea of Toleration
• (3) The diversity of ideas which the Christian conception of
truth contains is evident in these three different types of religion,
and this explains the complicated and inconsistent relation of
Christianity to the authority of the State and to the idea of
toleration.
# The aim pf the Church is to be the Church of the people and
of the masses ; it therefore transfers all divine and sacred character
from individuals to the objective organ of redemption, with its
divine* endowment of grace and truth. The Church possesses a
redeeming energy which is directly miraculous, and in contrast
to all other kinds of human power. Thus it possesses an absolute
directly divine truth and doctrinal authority over against all
human subjectivity. In its very nature such truths must be uni-
form and universally authoritative. Thus in the Church itself this
unchangeable truth is justified, and indeed bound to maintain
its supremacy over pastors and teachers, and also over the laity.
Every idealistic attempt to ascribe this development of the truth
to the inward miraculous power of the Church itself, without
compulsion, breaks down in the practical impossibility of carrying
it through, and simply results in a return to compulsion. This
attitude of compulsion must, however, finally express itself ex-
ternally, because errors and customs which dishonour God ought
not to be tolerated, and because it is not right that people who
have been born into the membership of the Church* should be
allowed to fall a prey to temptation. Finally, the Church must
see to it that the whole nation shall hear the message of salvation,
and that everyone shall have at least contact with divine
salvation. Mercy requires it, and the absolute divine origin of the
truth of salvation justifies this procedure. Here it is permissible
to force people for their own good. This, however, demands the
co-operation of the material power of the State, without which
neither the inner uniformity of the Church, nor the building up
of popular and territorial churches, would ever have come into
998 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
existence. In all ithis the Church is only fulfilling its duty towards
Divine Truth. This line of argument explains the rise of the
complicated question of the relation between Church and State.
The point of view of the sects, however, is quite different. They
do not wish to be popular churches, but Christian denominations
composed of “saints”. The sects are small groups which exist
alongside of the State and Society. They also maintain that they
possess the absolute truth of the Gospel, but they claim that this
truth is far beyond the spiritual grasp of the masses and of the
State, and therefore they desire to be free from the State, further,
since it is precisely this absolute Gospel which forbids them to
use force, authority, or law, they also must renounce forcing their
opinions upon anyone, either within or without their community.
Hence they demand external toleration, the religious neutrality
of the State. Within their own borders, however, they practise
a spiritual discipline of doctrine and of morals. They possess ^he
tolerance of an idealism which believes in its own cause, and they
forbid their followers to deduce from the absolute character of
Truth the right to use violence in order to enforce it upon others.
They do not expect to see the Truth permeating the masses before
the Last Day. Where various sectarian groups exist alongside of
each other, they permit the exercise of purely spiritual controversy
and merely ethical rivalry without losing faith in the absolute char-
acter of the truth they possess. This truth is not meant for the
masses, or for humanity in general; and it will only attain its
final consummation at the Last Day. Their conception of tolera-
tion and freedom of conscience is of a toleration extended to
groups like their own by the churches and the ruling powers;
within their own borders, however, they had very little idea of
toleration, since here Scriptural law prevails. Since, however,
in order to uphold this unity they renounce State aid, and at
the most can exercise the method of social boycott, endless
divisions arise among them. It is a fact that real conformity can
only be secured with the aid of the State and the exercise of
compulsion.
Finally, the point of view of spiritual idealism and mysticism
differs entirely from that of the churches or the sects. From its
standpoint the truth of salvation is inward and relative, a personal
possession which is unutterable, and lies unspoken beneath all
literal forms. The merely relative significance of the Biblical,
dogmatic, or ritual form in which Truth is expressed makes
mysticism independent of all liistoric forms, and the inner Unity
of the Spirit quite naturally unites all souls in the common truth
CONCLUSION
999
which is purely spiritual, and impossible to forihulate. From this
point of view, and from it alone, are toleration and freedom of
conscience also possible within the religious community, since the
organization becomes merely a method of ecclesiastical adminis-
tration, while the religious life itself can move freely under various
forms of expression which are relatively justified. This, however,
led to difficulties, for from this point of view it was very difficult
to decide by what authority it was possible to determine the
standard of what constituted Christianity in general. The usual
answer, “the Spirit recognizes the Spirit”, was found to be useless
•in practice. Hence this standpoint easily led to the giving up
of all and every kind of organized fellowship, or to a withdrawal
into private groups of a purely personal character composed of
kindred souls. As well as conformity mysticism threatens to
sacrifice fellowship altogether, and it easily falls into a compara-
tive individualism. The problem of Christian toleration and
liberty of conscience in relation to the conditions of the formation
of religious fellowship belongs to this group of ideas. There is
no escape from it. There are only varying practical suggestions
of approximate utility which emerge out of this tragic interplay
of forces.
History of the Christian Ethos
(4) Another result of this inquiry is the light which it throws
upon the history of the Christian Ethos, a subject which, as is
well known, presents extraordinary difficulties. The Ethos of the
Gospel is a combination of infinite sublimity and childlike in-
timacy. On the one hand, it demands the sanctification of the
self for # God by the practice of detachment from everything which
disturbs inward communion with God, and by the exercise of
everything which inwardly binds the soul with God’s Will. On
the other hand, it demands that brotherly love, which overcomes
in God all the tension and harshness of the struggle for existence,
of law, and of the merely external order, while it unites souls
in a deep spirit of mutual understanding, as well as in the most
self-sacrificing love, which, even in its simplest expressions, gives
a true hint of the nature of God Himself. This is an ideal which
requires a new world if it is to be fully realized ; it was this new
world-order that Jesus proclaimed in His Message of the Kingdom
of God. But it is an ideal which cannot be realized within this
\forld apart from compromise. Therefore the history of the
Christian Ethos becomes the story of a constantly renewed search
for this compromise, and of fresh opposition to this spirit of com-
1000 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
promise. The ChArch in particular, however, as a popular institu-
tion, is forced to compromise ; this she effects by transferring to
the institution the sanctity and the grace of forgiveness proper
to it as an institution; the Church completed this compromise
by making a covenant with the Stoic idea of the relative Law of
Nature, which has prevailed since the Fall, which permits for the
term of the earthly life the existence of law, might, tyranny,
war, private property, and the desire to acquire possessions; it
regards these things as the results of sin as well as means £or the
healing of sin.
When this compromise had been effected, however, within the c
Church, the average morality of the world and the strict morality
of holiness then separated and went their different ways. The
ethic of holiness became fused with the dualistic asceticism of
late antiquity, and organized the monastic system, whence it once
more influenced the world by permeating secular Vfe with its
higher ideals. Thus there arose a dualistic ethic which the classical
Catholic theory worked into an ingenious system of evolution:
the ascent from Nature to Grace.
Ecclesiastical Protestantism destroyed this dualism, and wove
both its elements into the ethic of the “calling” : Lutheranism
carried this out with a careless acceptance of existing conditions,
which are due to the presence of sin in the world, Calvinism
and Ascetic Protestantism in an attempt to restore in a rational
manner the holy community within the life of the world.
Alongside of these ecclesiastical compromises, however, there
stood from the beginning the sect, which desired to realize the
ideal of the Sermon on the Mount in all its purity; this view
forced it into sharp opposition to the world. In the form t of the
passive and persecuted sect it realized the ideal with the fewest
concessions in small and quiet groups, and comforted itself with
the thought of the coming Kingdom of God, until, through its
connection with Ascetic Protestantism, it also found a way of
becoming incorporated with the life of this present world. In the
form of the aggressive sect, when the End of the World seemed
imminent, it felt justified in using force, and tried to establish
the Christian order of life by violent methods; naturally, the
experiment was never permanently successful ; also such outbreaks
always damaged the real Christianity of the sect, for then the
Apocalypse and the Old Testament took the place of the Gospel.
Finally, untroubled by any of these questions of compromise,
mysticism and “spiritual religion” went its own way, proclaiming
the freedom of the Spirit and liberty of conscience, antinomian
CONCLUSION
ioo i
in the good, and also incidentally in the bad, sknse ; even where
it was severely ascetic it maintained its spirit of freedom. This
is the piety which acts or refrains from action as it is “moved
by the Spirit”, to use the language of the Quakers; that is, its
action is controlled by its sense of inward communion with the
living and holy God, and it expresses itself in a purely inward
personal communion of individuals. This point of view certainly
prevents its influencing the masses, or effecting any kind of
organisation of life on a large scale. But from the very outset
this type of Christianity does not expect to influence the life of
•the world on a large scale; or if it does cherish such hopes it
bases them purely on confidence in the interior “power of the
Spirit”. In the general way, it leaves to chance the question of
the extension of its spirit into the general life of the world, and
of a consequent inner transformation. In all these ethical move-
ments, howgver, the impelling power is that of Christian hostility
to the world. To-day this fundamental Christian tendency has
been sensibly weakened by the tendencies of modern life : with
it®. Utilitarianism and its optimism, with its ideas of Immanence,
its Naturalism, and its aesthetic glorification of Nature, often to
the extent of being unable to interpret its own meaning. But it
breaks forth anew from the fundamental ideas of religion and
out of the self-destruction of every kind of purely secular op-
timism. In the midst of all the pleasures of civilization and of
all mere sceptical pessimism, once again it summons the Christian
ethic to face its task.
To-day, therefore, the main problem of the Christian Ethos is
still the problem of supernaturalism, and of its unavoidable result,
asceticism, in the metaphysical-dualistic or in the disciplinary
rigorist sense, an asceticism which is never merely a simple denial
of the world and of self. On the other hand, its second main
problem is how to supplement this religious onesidedness with
an ethic of civilization which can be combined with it. The
Church effected this supplement by drawing on the philosophy
of late antiquity, and incorporating into its own ethic the idea
of the moral Law of Nature. When the sect gave up this idea of
a supplement of this kind altogether, it became uncultured
and insignificant, while mysticism became complete and solitary
resignation. Whenever both these movements rose to importance,
they likewise introduced, each in its own way, a supplement.
Tb-day, however, in an entirely new state of civilization these
earlier supplementary movements have become impossible.
A new supplementary process, therefore, is necessary. In a
iooa THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
permanent worldj the Christian Ethos cannot live and be entirely
self-sufficing. The* question is simply this : How can this supplement
be shaped to-day? The answer to this question constitutes an
imperative demand for a new Christian ethic.
Significance of the Marxist Method for the
Study of Christian History
(5) The last important point which is illuminated by our
historical survey is that of the right to apply a method of social
history to Christianity, and the limits within which this may be
exercised. The “Marxist” method, especially those elements*
within it which seem clearly justified, is gradually transforming
all our historical conceptions, and naturally it also transforms
all our ideas about the present and the future. Scholars of the
“class-war” school have undertaken to represent the whole of
Christianity as an ideological reflection of economic development,
and in so doing they have not only impressed the comrades
within their own Party. In a finer and more instructive way
quite recently Maurenbrecher applied this conception to the
origin of Christianity. In opposition to the exclusive and doc-
trinaire application of this method, however, the whole of this
survey has shown that all that is specifically religious, and, above
all, the great central points of religious development, are an
independent expression of the religious life. Jesus, Paul, Origen,
Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Francis of Assisi, Bonaventura,
Luther, Calvin: as we study their thought and their feeling we
realize that it is impossible to regard them as the product of
class struggles and of economic factors.
On the other hand, however, it is clear that in the causal
connection out of which their peculiar form of religious thought
gains concrete stimulus, force, movement, and aim, social and
even, finally, economic influences are at work, though this is not
always apparent, and their significance varies considerably. As
in all other spheres of life, so also in that of the history of religion,
the conception of the causal connection is considerably widened
and altered by giving fresh attention to this co-operating element.
As previously we have been in the habit of placing scientific-
historical, philosophical, race-theory biological causalities in the
context out of which and in which the concrete movements of
religious history arise, so also this newly discovered causality
must be accepted in its full significance. In theory this means
nothing new, once we have become accustomed to the idea of
seeing religious revelations developing out of a causal connection ;
CONCLUSION 1003
we will not deal further with their supposed “Necessity”, or with
“supposed laws of history”. Causality knows no hierarchy; no
degree of greater or lesser importance, and so it is no depreciation
of previous theories (as many people suppose) if this newly
discovered causality is granted just as much right to exist as
those which were previously in a position of honour. In practice,
however, this does mean a considerable shifting of emphasis. It
then becomes clear that Christianity and the idealistic ethical and
religiqjus aspirations and endeavours of late antiquity (which were
so closely akin to Christianity) were certainly connected with the
• final result of the social history of the Ancient World, and there-
fore they also met and united to form the new world; we have
seen how the Middle Ages maintained its existence with the
support of the Church and of the Christian Ethos within a rela-
tively simple and undeveloped social setting, and that only thus
did a Christian civilization become possible; we have seen that
the individualism of the Reformation presupposed the collapse
of rqediaeval society, and that the triumphant realization of
Ae Reformation can only be explained from the standpoint of
political and social conditions ; we have seen that the difference
between the two great divisions of Protestantism is very largely
caused and conditioned by its political and social setting; we
have seen how modern Protestantism is bound up with modern
bourgeois society and with their ideals of civilization, and, finally,
we have seen that Capitalism, the modern Nationalist and
Imperialist State, and the vast increase in the population of the
world, constitute a crisis for the previous Christian ethic. The
social position and relations of the sects reveal the hidden reasons
for sudden changes of religious thought, which could not have
been explained from their merely intellectual dialectic.
All this means that the history of religion is being drawn far
more deeply into the stream of events, and into the varying
conditions within the fundamental elements in life. Thus it
becomes still less possible to find an unchangeable and absolute
point in the Christian ethic, since this also only means the mastery
of an existing situation, which is determined pre-eminently by
social conditions and the establishment of an ideal which corre-
sponds to this situation. The history of religion, however, has
long been moving towards such a conception, ever since it learned
to place the religious life within the general current of historical
Evolution. Thus it becomes clearer than ever that each factor is
relatively conditioned as a synthesis which cannot be repeated,
and as a spiritual-ethical mastery of this particular situation,
1004 THE SOCIAj, TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
which often sees Jhith much more clearly in the instinctive side
of life than in the theory which overlooks and condones so much.
Thus, finally, it becomes impossible to regard whole periods and
groups solely as preparatory phases for an Absolute which can
never be found in history. We then perceive the force of that
pregnant phrase of Ranke (to which reference has often been
made) that each epoch — not in its crude actuality, but with the
aims and ideals which it has instinctively formed — exists directly
for God. This truth also applies to the mastery of the tasks which
arise out of the natural basis of life, from the economic social
situation, out of the political conditions of power, by thought, «
in which thought can never be independent of the material
which it has mastered, and by which it is frequently set in motion.
On the other hand, however, all attempts to make Christianity
into a changeful reflection of economic and social history are
either a foolish fashion, or under cover of the most repent science
they conceal a hidden attack on the religious value of Christianity.
Nature of the Christian Ethos ^
(6) All these results are of an historical nature. The question,
however, naturally arises : Does an extended inquiry of this kind
about the Christian world of life and thought really yield nothing
more than historical light on the past and on its influence upon
the present? Does it not also teach something lasting and eternal
about the content of the Christian social Ethos, which might
serve as a guiding star for the present and for the future, some-
thing which would aid us not merely to understand but also to
transform the situation? It certainly is in the position of being
able to teach us something of this kind. But perceptions of eternal
ethical values are not scientific perceptions, and cannot be proved
along scientific lines. These perceptions have been selected from
life in history, which the living conviction and the active will
fully apprehend in the certainty that here we perceive absolute
Reason in the revelation which is addressed to us and formed in
the present connection. Only in this sense is the attempt now made
to emphasize the permanent ethical values which are contained
within the varied history of the Christian social doctrines.
Firstly: The Christian Ethos alone possesses, in virtue of its
personalistic Theism, a conviction of personality and individual-
ity, based on metaphysics, which no Naturalism and no Pessimism
can disturb. That personality which, rising above the natural order
of life, is only achieved through a union of will and the depths of
being with God, alone transcends the finite, and alone can defy
CONCLUSION
1005
it. Without this support, however, every kind of individualism
evaporates into thin air. '
Secondly: The Christian Ethos alone, through its conception of
a Divine Love which embraces all souls and unites them all,
possesses a Socialism which cannot be shaken. It is only within
the medium of the Divine that the separation and reserve, the
strife and exclusiveness which belong to man as a natural product,
and which shape his natural existence, disappear. Only here do
the associations formed by compulsion, sympathy and need of
help, sex instinct and attraction, work and organization attain a
' connection which transcends them all, a connection which is
indestructible because it is metaphysical.
Thirdly: Only the Christian Ethos solves the problem of equality
and inequality, since it neither glorifies force and accident in the
sense of a Nietzschian cult of breed, nor outrages the patent facts
of life by a^doctrinaire equalitarianism. It recognizes differences in
social position, power, and capacity, as a condition which has been
established by the inscrutable Will of God ; and then transforms
this condition by the inner upbuilding of the personality, and the
development of the mutual sense of obligation, into an ethical
cosmos. The ethical values of voluntary incorporation and
subordination on the one hand, and of care and responsibility
for others on the other hand, place each human being in circum-
stances where natural differences can and should be transmuted
into the ethical values of mutual recognition, confidence, and
care for others.
Fourthly: Through its emphasis upon the Christian value of
personality, and on love, the Christian Ethos creates something
which # no social order — however just and rational — can dispense
with entirely, because everywhere there will always remain
suffering, distress, and sickness for which we cannot account — in
a word, it produces charity. Charity, or active helpfulness, is the
fruit of the Christian Spirit, which alone keeps it alive. Whatever
pettiness and desire to convert may be bound up with it must
simply be regarded as human limitations within something
which is great and noble.
In conclusion: The Christian Ethos gives to all social life and
aspiration a goal which lies far beyond all the relativities of this
earthly life, compared with which, indeed, everything else repre-
sents merely approximate values. The idea of the future Kingdom
<5f God, which is nothing less than faith in the final realization
of the Absolute (in whatever way we may conceive this realiza-
tion), does not, as short-sighted opponents imagine, render this
ioo6 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
world and life in this world meaningless and empty; on the
contrary, it stirmilates human energies, making the soul strong
through its various stages of experience in the certainty of an
ultimate, absolute meaning and aim for human labour. Thus it
raises the soul above the world without denying the world. This
idea, which is the deepest meaning of all Christian asceticism, is
the only means by which strength and heroism may be main-
tained in a general spiritual situation, in which the emotional life
is infinitely deepened and refined, and in which the natural
motives for heroism are either altogether lost, or else the attempt
is made to try to reawaken them on the side of brutal instinct. *
This idea creates a perennial source of strength for strenuous
activity, and a certainty of aim, both of which make for simple
health and soundness of mind. All social Utopias, then, become
superfluous; over and over again experience teaches that the
ideal cannot be fully realized; but this does not mefin that the
seeker for Truth and justice need lose heart and fall back into
scepticism, a temptation to which serious and truth-loving souls
are prone, and the effects of which are very manifest among the
finer spirits of the present day. The life beyond this world is, in
very deed, the inspiration of the life that now is.
What is the best Form of Organization
for Christian Religious Life?
(7) These social and ethical ideas and energies spring out of the
Christian religion. To enable them to do this it is necessary to
maintain the vitality and to extend the scope of these religious
energies ; again, in order to achieve both these ends, an organiza-
tion is needed which will lead them forward and continually
produce them afresh.
This leads us to the question : What does our present inquiry
teach us about this problem, which is a question of vital impor-
tance, about the formation of the religious community itself and
its incorporation into the other great movements? Can we not
learn something from a large work of this kind to help us to
overcome our miserable ecclesiastical situation, which is daily
becoming worse?
Here also the yield is a rich one, although it is more <a matter
of free insight into what is expedient than a scientific proof.
The first thing we learn is, that the religious life — on the plane of
spiritual religion — needs an independent organization, in order tb
distinguish it from other organizations of a natural kind. It strives
after this from the moment it conceives of an independent exist-
CONCLUSION 1007
ence, and this always remains one of its most important problems.
Public worship forms the centre of such an organization; the
derivation of comprehensive energies from it, or the organic
attachment of them to it, is the great problem. Unless it is organ-
ized into a community with a settled form of worship, Christ-
ianity cannot be either expansive or creative. Every kind of
reaction to a mere “freedom of the Spirit” in the hope that it will
grow and thrive without organization, is a Utopian ideal which is
out of touch with the actual conditions of life, and its only effect
is to weaken the whole.
• Secondly, so far as the form of this organization is concerned,
it has become evident that the Church-type is obviously superior to
the sect-type and to mysticism. The Church-type preserves in-
violate the religious elements of grace and redemption ; it makes
it possible to differentiate between Divine grace and human
effort ; it is ^ble to include the most varied degrees of Christian
attainment and maturity, and therefore it alone is capable of
fostering a popular religion which inevitably involves a great
variety in its membership. In this respect the Church-type is
superior to the sect-type and also to mysticism. This is why the
main current of historical Christianity becomes the “History of
the Church”, and this is why the first result of the missionary
work of the Early Church was “the universal Christian Church”.
At the same time, however, it cannot be denied that this does
mean a modification of Christian thought in order to bring it
down to the average level, to the level of practical possibility;
and it is a principle of far-reaching adjustment and compromise.
In the third place : the Church-type itself, just because of this
element of tension between pure Christianity and adjustment to
the world which exists within it, has had a very changeful history,
and is to-day becoming entirely transformed. Roman Catholicism
is the pure and logical form of the Church-type; to an ever-
increasing degree it has sacrificed the inwardness, individuality,
and plasticity of religion to the fixed determination to make
religion objective in doctrine, Sacrament, hierarchy, the Papacy
and Papal Infallibility; the only outlet it gives to the sect-type
and to mysticism is through the Religious Orders and the devo-
tions of 4;he Church. Since the crisis in the fifteenth century,
when men’s confidence in its right to dominate was shaken, it
has therefore set itself to become more and more objective and
centralized. Protestantism, on the other hand, has developed in
the opposite direction, seeking to make the idea of the Church
more subjective and inward, by placing the objective organizing
ioo8 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
element in the I^oly Scriptures and in the spiritual power which
dwells within thfe'm, and also in the ministry which expounds the
Word. Luther based his hopes on the all-converting power of the
Spirit and of the Word, a hope which was speedily disappointed,
while Calvin sought the support of a stable ecclesiastical constitu-
tion with authority to control the faithful.
All the ecclesiastical institutions soon found that they were
unable to maintain and carry on their existence by moral force
alone, and they were obliged to appeal to the civil power for aid.
Without its help no ecclesiastical system can be permanent,
uniform, and undivided. This situation cannot be conceived#
without compulsion, and compulsory religion cannot be con-
ceived without the help of the State. In periods when a naive
type of faith is widespread, this kind of compulsion is not harmful,
nor does it militate against religion. If one is quite sure of the
truth, and if the general instincts of the nations are united on this
point, then the preservation from folly, error, and the danger of
being led astray is only sensible and healthy ; it is the assumption
upon which the spiritual unity of Society in general is maintain^
which it is not right to sacrifice to the doctrinaire and super-
idealistic ideal of free self-legislation on the part of the individual.
In the fourth place : precisely because the Church-type is thus
connected with the unbroken unity of an instinctive world-outlook
of great masses of people the uniform Church-type is inwardly
suitable for such periods alone. We have seen, in the course of
this inquiry, that since these assumptions have disappeared the
Church-type has been going through a process of decay and even
of destruction. The days of the pure Church-type within our
present civilization are numbered. Ideas which the modern
world accepts as natural and obvious do not agree with the
views of the Church. Compulsion is no longer a defence of the
whole against individual disturbance ; it only means the forcible
restraint of currents of real vitality. Either completely or partially
the civil power has retired into the background, and soon it will
cease to have any influence at all.
In countries where the religious situation contains many
different elements, the various ecclesiastical systems constitute a
large body of opinion, in which each particular communion
claims to possess the sole Truth, thus neutralizing the religious
influence of all. The churches are losing their hold on the spiritual
life of the nations, and many of their functions are now being
exercised by educationists, writers, administrators, and by volun-
tary religious associations. Under these circumstances the Catholic
CONCLUSION 1009
Church-type has been forced to exercise an increasingly powerful
and external dominion over the consciences ormen. The Pro-
testant churches, on the other hand, have not exercised the same
influence. This is due to two causes: (1) because they are not
sufficiently vigorous to be able to do this ; and (2) because their
subjective interpretation of the idea of the Church contains strong
tendencies which are directly opposed to a development of this
kind. Thus they have not been able to withstand the influence of
the sect-type and mysticism, both of which are tendencies which
have a close affinity with the modern world. The Protestant
•Church-type, therefore, has persisted with the aid of sectarian
ideas and the relativism of idealism and mysticism. Protestantism
no longer represents the pure Church-type, although the ecclesi-
astical spirit of conformity has raised indignant enough protests
against this irresistible development, and either secretly or openly
c^ts longing glances at Catholic ideals. Protestantism is develop-
ing at present along the following lines : separation between
Church and State; suspension of the endeavour to form new
churcfies ; the independence of the individual congregation ; the
transformation of State churches into popular churches in which
there is / a united system of administration, while the individual
congregations are left a free hand to manage their own affairs;
by this very fact, however, these churches contain a certain
amount of high explosive which is a continual menace to their
existence. Even beneath the veil of an apparently stable united
confessional Church, the lack of denominational principle on the
part of most of the members has produced this situation. More
and more the central life of the Church-type is being permeated
with the vital energies of the sect and of mysticism; the whole
history of Protestantism reveals this very clearly. While Catholi-
cism does all it can to hinder the development of these tendencies,
they are both becoming stronger and stronger within the Protes-
tant churches. In the mutual interpenetration of the three chief
sociological categories, which must be united with a structure
which will reconcile them all, lie its future tasks, tasks of a socio-
logical and organizing kind, which are more pressing than all
doctrinal questions. Along this path all efforts to achieve a recon-
ciling unity have failed. An “Ecclesiastical Protestant system of
dogma” no longer exists. Thus it is evident that union and
cohesion must be sought in some other sphere than in that of
ddjgma. This will only be possible on the assumption that the
churches which have been created by compulsion, on a basis of
authority and rigid conformity, may become homes within which
VOL. II. NN
1010 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Christians of very varying outlook can live and work together in
peace.
The ecclesiastical organizations maintain themselves by their
own historic weight, and, once they have been created, they can
serve other ends than those for which they were originally con-
structed. The pain and travail which the State Church system has
cost in its day may be regarded as a sacrifice which the effort of
building it has cost ; but it does not need to be continually repeated.
The home which was constructed by compulsion and relentless
insistence upon rigid conformity to a uniform type of doctrine and
organization can thus be inhabited by finer spirits and especially*
by souls of very varied types ; they will then, it is true, have to
guard the spirit of mutual toleration within certain wide limits.
While a mere system of Free Church organization, or a system
based on the separation between Church and State, only ensures
liberty of conscience alongside of and outside of tjhe churches
while within them it fosters a very real spirit of intolerance, a
system of that kind would be able to maintain a national (or
popular) Church, and yet preserve at the same time liberty«of
conscience (so ardently desired) within the Church itself, so far
as that is at all possible. The spirit of the Church-type would thus
be maintained in its great conviction of an historical substance
of life which is common to all, a substance which, in the various
smaller religious groups and declarations, would be expressed,
partly in one group and partly in another, which would preserve
the whole from stagnation. We thus retain the sense of a common
faith and the consciousness of a great inheritance as a “Minimum
of the Church” as Richard Rothe used to say.
Christianity and the Modern Social Problem
(8) What has become of the question, however, from which
we originally started? — the question of the significance of Christ-
ianity for the solution of the social problem of the present day?
This social problem is vast and complicated. It includes the
problem of the capitalist economic period and of the industrial
proletariat created by it ; and of the growth of militaristic and
bureaucratic giant states; of the enormous increase in popula-
tion, which affects colonial and world policy, of the mechanical
technique, which produces enormous masses of material and
links up and mobilizes the whole world for purposes of trade,
but which also treats men and labour like machines. •
Bearing in mind the whole trend of this book, we only need
to formulate this question thus in order to recognize as its most
CONCLUSION
IOI i
important reply that this problem is entirely new, a problem with
which Christian-Social work has never been confronted until now.
In face of the vast and serious nature of this problem the radical
ideals of social reformers of the Chiliastic sects seem like child’s
play and childish fantasies ; admirable and noble, no doubt, but
Utopian even in their modern form of a Christian Socialism
which dreams of a radical social transformation of the world.
From the very outset mysticism declined to make any attempt
to find a solution of the problem; in all this confusion it only
discerrfls how impossible it is for the world to give the peace which
.passes all understanding.
All the Christian churches — the Lutheran Church least of all,
however — are evolving schemes for the alleviation of all this
distress which weighs on our hearts and minds like a perpetual
menace, and each church does its part eagerly and unselfishly.
But in all this the churches are only returning in essentials to the
ofd and great main types of their social philosophy, which they
are trying to mobilize afresh for the titanic struggles of the present
day. Now, as we have seen, there are only two great main types
otsocial philosophy which have attained comprehensive historical
significance and influence. The first is the social philosophy of
mediaeval Catholicism which is based on the family, guild, and
class, which was able to combine a relative dependence on the
struggle for existence, the establishment of all fellowship upon
personal relations of authority and reverence, the relatively
simple economic forms and needs of the pre-capitalistic period,
the remains of old solidarities in conditions which involved being
bound to the soil or involved in the fortunes of some ancient
family, with the Christian Ethos of the personal value of the
individual and of the universal fellowship of love within the
ecclesiastical organization of life. The second is the social philo-
sophy of Ascetic Protestantism, which developed out of that kind
*of Calvinism which was tinged with a Free Church, Pietistic
Outlook, and also out of those ascetic sects which had almost
broken with the churches altogether, which is inwardly related
to modem Utilitarianism and Rationalism, with diligence in one’s
calling and the glorification of work for its own sake, with political
democracy and Liberalism, with the freedom of the individual
and the all-dominating idea of the social group, which, however,
knows how to neutralize the ethically dangerous consequences of
modem life by the religious ideas of the responsibility of the
individual, and of the duty of love, both of the individual and of
the community, through the taboo on luxury, mammon, and
ioia THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
love of pleasure, and finally through heroism in serving the cause
of Christ all ovdf the world.
Other Christian-Social ideals which developed alongside of
these two main types were unable to make any impression on the
hard mass of social realities ; against this rock they fling themselves
in vain to-day.
Both these powerful types of social philosophy, however, in
spite of their great and enduring achievements, have now spent
their force. So far as Catholicism of the patriarchal guild type is
concerned, its failure is due to the fact that it is almost a sheer
impossibility to realize its aims at the present day ; a further cause*
of failure is the fact that these ideals cannot be carried out in
practice, owing to the weakened religious forces of Catholicism ;
this also produces other results which are almost intolerable. Ascetic
Protestantism, however, which had attempted to establish the
rule of Christ over Society by a rational method, controlled by
the ruling idea of religion, finds to its dismay that tfie results of
its theory have long ago slipped away from its control, and that
they have cast aside as useless all the original restrictions ajad
landmarks, whether religious, intellectual, or metaphysical. On
the other hand, by its cool austerity, its restraint and its concrete
outlook, its proselytizing zeal, and its inartistic and Puritan
characteristics, it is opposed to all the instincts of modern civiliza-
tion; from the purely religious standpoint also its tendency to
legalism and Pharisaism, to feverish activity and a mechanical
outlook, is very far from being in complete agreement with the
deepest Christian ideas.
Under these circumstances our inquiry leads to the conclusion
that all Christian-Social work is in a problematic condition. It is
problematic in general because the power of thought to overcome
brutal reality is always an obscure and difficult question; it is
problematic in particular because the main historic forms of the
Christian doctrine of society and of social development are
to-day, for various reasons, impotent in face of the tasks by which
they are confronted.
If the present social situation is to be controlled by Christian
principles, thoughts will be necessary which have not yet been
thought, and which will correspond to this new situatiqn as the
older forms met the need of the social situation in earlier ages.
These ideas will have to be evolved out of the inner impulse of
Christian thought, and out of its vital expression at the present
time, and not exclusively out of the New Testament, in precisely
the same way as both those great main types of Christian-Social
CONCLUSION
i
1013
philosophy were evolved out of the Christian ^hought of their
own day, and not solely from the New Testament. And when
they have been created and expressed, they will meetjthe fate
which always awaits every fresh creation of religious and ethical
thought: they will render indispensable services and they will
develop profound energies, but they will never fully realize their
actual ideal intention within the sphere of our earthly struggle
and conflict.
As little as any other power in this world will they create the
Kingdom of God upon earth as a completed social ethical organ-
ism. One of the most serious and important truths which emerge
as a result of this inquiry is this: every idea is still faced by
brutal facts, and all upward movement is checked and hindered
by interior and exterior difficulties. Nowhere does there exist an
absolute Christian ethic, which only awaits discovery; all that
w$e can do in to learn to control the world-situation in its successive
phases just as the earlier Christian ethic did in its own way.
Ther$ is also no absolute ethical transformation of material
nurture or of human nature; all that does exist is a constant
wrestling with the problems which they raise. Thus the Christian
ethic of the present day and of the future will also only be an
adjustment to the world-situation, and it will only desire to
achieve that which is practically possible. This is the cause of that
ceaseless tension which drives man onward yet gives him the sense
that he can never realize his ethical ideal. Only doctrinaire ideal-
ists or religious fanatics can fail to recognize these facts. Faith is
the source of energy in the struggle of life, but life still remains a
battle which is continually renewed upon ever new fronts. For
every threatening abyss which is closed, another yawning gulf
appears. The truth is — and this is the conclusion of the whole
matter — the Kingdom of God is within us. But we must let our
light shine before men in confident and untiring labour that they
may see our good works and praise our Father in Heaven. The
final ends of all humanity are hidden within His Hands.
INDEX OF NAMES 1
Abelard, 235
Adventists, 725
Agrippa v. Nettesheim, 769
Althusius, 634 ff.
Amesius, 684
Anabaptists, v. Baptists
Andrea* J. V., 570
Anglicans, 639, 668, 672, 678
•Arcadius, 139
Arians, 209
Aristotle, 119, 239, 259, 264, 268 ff.,
270 ff, 292, 298 ff, 317, 329, 369,
505 , 5o 8> 524, 527, 535 ff.
Arminians, 635, 683 ff.
Afndt, Johanfies, 786
Arnold of Brescia, 237, 351
Arnokl, Gottfried, 334, 788
As'ietic Protestantism, 688 ff., 805,
807 ff., 815, 818
Augustine, St., 74, no, 119, 154, 156,
158, 212, 230, 239, 244, 259, 266,
282, 329, 333, 369, 737
Bacon, Francis, 777
Baptist Movement, 694 ff.
Baptists, at Zurich, 703 ff.
Baptists, General, 706 ff.
Barebones Parliament, 667, 709, 713
Barrowe, Henry, 662 ff., 665
Baxter, Richard, 678
Bayle, Pierre, 674
Beghards, 371
Beguines, 371
Bellers, John, 712, 726, 783
Benedictines, 244
Bentham, Jeremy, 646
Bernard (St.) of Clairvaux, 237, 245,
684, 730, 737, 777, 786, 787
Bernstein, 782
Beza, ThecJdore, 629 f., 643, 650 ff.
Bismarck, 24, 675
Bodin, 537
Bttehme, Jakob, 769, 774, 792
Bona ventura, St., 352
Boniface, 217
Brethren of the Common Life, 371
Brethren of the Free Spirit, 355
Browne, Robert, 661 ff , 665, 707
Brownists, 661 ff.
Bucer, Martin, 626, 669, 677, 678
Biinderlin, 769
Bunyan, John, 678, 679, 709, 772
Byzantinism, 214, 215
Calixtines, 363
Calvin, 579 ff.
Calvinism, 576 ff.
Calvinism, primitive, 625 ff.
Carlyle, 795
Carolingian Dynasty, 215, 219, 224,
246
Carpocratians, 40
Cartwright, 678
Castellio, Sebastian, 762 ff.
Cathari, 245, 350, 354
Catherine of Genoa (St.), 787
Celsus, 124, 15 1
Charlemagne, 217 f., 244, 246
Chiliasm, 369, 380, 680, 704 ff.,
709 ff., 713, 758
Chrysostom, 127, 212
Cicero, 15 1, 505, 508
Cluniacs, 220, 224 ff.
Collegiants, 766, 771, 774
Comenius, 770
Congregationalism, 663 ff.
Constantine, 125, 130, 138, 151, 463,
788
Coornheert, 749, 764 ff., 785
Cosmas Indicopleustes, 143
Cromwell, Oliver, 668 ff, 675, 678,
778
Crusades, 222, 240, 254, 352
Cynics, no, 119
Damiani, Peter, 229, 237
Dana us, Lambert, 631
Dante, 229, 231, 245, 352
Volume II. begins at p. 455.
ioi6 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Darbyites (Plymouth Brethren), 725
Darwin, 676
Dell, John, 753, 778 f.
Denk, Hans, 768 ff., 777
Descartes, 74
Diggers, 71 1
Diocletian, Reign of, 128
Dionysius the Areopagite, 259, 737,
777
Dippel, 788
Dolcino, 356, 370
Dominicans, 736
Domitian, 42
Donatists, 209, 329, 333, 350
Dordrecht, Synod of, 683
Drews, Arthur, 788
Duplessis-Mornay, 631
Eckhart, 796
Edelmann, 749, 788
Emden, Synod of, 683
Emerson, 795
Enlightenment, The, 279, 672, 681,
819
Entfelder, 769
Epictetus, 66, 67
Erasmus, 635, 750, 760, 764
Erastianism, 659, 683
Estienne, Henri, 631
Eudo de Stella, 351
Everard, John, 777
Familists, 71 1, 770, 772, 777
Fichte, 792, 794
Fifth Monarchy Men, 667
Filmer, Robert, 637
Flagellants, 356
Fludd, 769
Fox, George, 778
Francis (St.) of Assisi, 355 ff., 362,
777
Franciscans, 229, 231, 237, 245, 352,
355. 359. 374. 736
Franck, Sebastian, 334, 484, 71 1, 741,
750, 760 fr., 765, 767 ff., 769, 775,
79*. 792. 796
Francke, August Hermann, 787
Franklin, Benjamin, 783
Fries, 790
Galenua, Abrahams, 766
Gentillet, 631
George, Henry, 712
Geulinex, 774
Gichtel, 769
Gierke, 97, 98
Gladstone, 675
Gnosticism, 40, 105 ff., 147, 736, 769
Goethe, 792
Gregory the Great, 133, 154, 244, 259
Gregory VII., 212, 225 ff, 2*7, 229,
232
Grotius, Hugo, 538, 635
Hall, 777
Hamann, 792
Harnack, Adolf, 244
Harrison, 667, 709, 713
Hattem, Pontiaan van, ^74
Hatzer, 769
Hegel, 792,^94, 796 f.
Helmont, van, 769
Helwys, 707
Henry of Toulouse, 351
Herder, 792
Hermas, 150
Hobbes, Thomas, 639 ff.
Honorius, 139
Hooker, 637
Huguenots, 612, 650, 655, 677
Huss, John, 362 ff, 367
Hussites, 355, 358, 362 ff , 368 ff , 703,
754
Hut, 704
Independency, 365, 369, 514, 661,
663, 666 ff., 671, 694, 708 ff, 741,
778 fr.
Innocent III., 226
Institutio Calvini , 628
Irenaeus, 154
Irvingitcs, 725
Isidore (of Seville), 154
Jacobi, F. H., 792
Janeaway, James, 777
Jansenism, 715, 789
Jellinek, 672
Joachim, Abbot, 370
INDEX OF NAMES
Joachimites, 355, 366, 370
Joris, Davids 770 ff.
Jung Stilling, 785
Jurieu, 631, 653
Justinian, 130, 156
Kant, 279, 544, 618, 792
Karls tadt, 738, 741, 755 ff., 768
Kautsky, 28
Kepler, 769 ff.
Knox, 5 ohn, 632, 655
Kuyper, 655, 660, 676
La Badie, Jean de, 724 ff.
Labadists, 724
Lactantius, 151
Lagarde, 801
Lampe, 653
Casko, John% 678
Lavater, 785
Leibniz, 636, 792 »
•Lessing, 792, 799
Levellers, 710
Lilburn, John, 710, 712
Locke, 636 ff, 646, 669, 672, 712
Lodensteyn, 684, 724, 774
Lollards, 358
Luther, 465 ff, 515 ff , 603, 610, 613,
618, 692, 694, 716, 730, 740, 745,
75 ° 753 > 756 > 77 °
Lutheranism, 515 ff, 605 ff, 610, 613,
617, 641, 647, 649, 652, 678, 680,
690, 697, 714, 716 ff., 740, 803,
810 ff., 814, 819
Macchiavelli, 532, 559
Major, John, 632
Manchester School (econ.), 647
Marsiglio of Padua, 372
Marx, 726
Maurenbrecher, 1002
Melanchthon, 493, 523, 527, 535 ff.,
613
Mennonifes, 705 ff., 662, 699, 781, 805
Merovingians, 221
Methodists, 689, 715, 721 ff, 74 L 759 >
9 784 ff.
Methodius, St., 131
Meyer, Edward, 206
Mill, John Stuart, 677
Millennarians, 712
Milton, John, 671, 674
Monarchomachi, 630 ff, 651
Monk, General, 709
Monophysite Churches, 209
Montanism, 148, 329
Moravians, 719 ff, 788 ff.
More, Sir Thomas, 278, 378
Miinzer, Thomas, 754 ff.
Murton, 707
Nathusius, 26, 28, 33
Naumann, 568
Nazarenes, 771
Neo-Calvinism, 673 ff, 688 ff., 805 ff.
Neo-Platonism, 239, 271, 273, 276,
329, 736 ff., 748, 770, 777, 788,
792
Nestorians, 209
Nicholas da Cusa, 278
Niclaes, Hendrik, 772 ff.
Nietzsche, 571
Nominalism, 278, 464
Novalis, 790, 794, 797
Occhino, 762
Ockham, William of, 374, 464, 480
Oldenbarneveld, 636
Origen, 1 51, 777
Ortlieb, 355
Osiander, 738
Otto I and II, Emperors, 215, 220
Owen, Richard, 712, 726, 784
Paracelsus, 769, 790
Patarini, 350
Pelagian Controversy, no
Penn, William, 782 ff.
Peter of Bruys, 351
Peter of Chelzic, 367
Peutinger, 559
Philip of Hesse, 669
Pietism, 514, 567, 657, 677 ff., 686 ff.,
714 ff., 740, 770, 771, 774, 777,
784 ff., 799
Pilgrim Fathers, 665 ff., 681
Pirckheimer, 559
Plato, 67
ioi8 THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
Platonism, 44, 47, 143, 163, 202 ff.,
231, 242, 249, 259, 792
Pliny, 42, 124
Plockboy, P. C., 712
Plotinus, 777
Poimandres, 777
Poiret, 769
Pordagc, John, 713
Precisianism, 682 ff.
Presbyterians, 634, 661, 666, 667,
678
Proclus, 777
Pufendorf, 538, 639
Puritanism, 365, 545, 609, 657, 659,
661, 663, 671, 677 ff., 683, 687, 697,
7 i 4 > 7 i 5 > 795
Quakers, 672, 712, 713, 723, 741, 748,
77o> 777> 780 ff, 81 1
Ranke, 207, 1004
Ranters, 772, 777
Remonstrants, 763
Richard of St. Victor, 730
Rijnsburger, v. Collegiants
Ritschl, 789
Robinson, 665, 707
Romanticism, 793 ff
Rosicrucians, 716
Rothe, Richard, 796, 802
Rous, Francis, 753, 777
Rousseau, 46, 636
Ruskin, John, 677, 795
Saint-Simon, 726, 797
Salian Franks, 215
Saltmarsh, John, 778 ff.
Salvation Army, 689, 725
Schelling, 792, 794
Schleiermacher , 746, 790, 793, 794,
795 > 798 ff , 802
Schmalkalden, League of, 532
Scholasticism, 275, 527
Schortinghuys, 774
Schwenkfeld, 738, 741, 751, 756 ff,
762, 767, 771
Seckendorff, L. von, 553, 562
Seekers, 777
Segalleli, Gerhard, 356
Seneca, 66, 67, 154
Servetus, 763, 769 ,*
Simons, Menno, 705
Smith, Adam, 646
Smyth, John, 706 ff.
Soccati, 356
Socialism, 621, 712, 729, 817
Socialism, Christian, 365, 602, 623,
649, 711, 726 ff., 802, 804 ff, 817,
818
Socinians, 749 *
Sombart, 645
Spencer, Herbert, 676
Spener, 716, 787
Spinoza, 636, 749, 774, 792
Spruyt, 766
Stahl, Julius, 538, 568, 675
Stein, Lorenz von, 28 ff.
Stoicism, 41, 47, 64 ff., 1V0, 143, 14 4,
152 ff, 162, 231, 239, 257, 258, 259,
3 2 9> 389* 508, 674, 728, 736 t
Swedenborg, 790 «* ♦
Taborites, 363 ff, 703, 754
Taffin, 683
Tamchelm, 351
Tauler, 768, 777, 787
Teellinck, 683, 774
Tersteegen, 753, 785
Tertullian, 120
Thamer, 769
Theologia Germanica , 377, 762, 768 f
777
Thomasius, Christian, 538 *
Thomas Aquinas (St.), 203, 230, 232,
272, 295, 298, 299, 312, 317 ff, 366,
375
Thomism, 257 ff, 280 ff, 293, 313 ff,
316 ff, 320, 461, 464, 465, 512, 515,
5 2 4 > 54 i
Tolstoi, 214, 728 f.
Udemann, 683
Utraquists, v. Caiixtines
Verschoor, Jakob, 774
Victorines, 235, 245, 737 4
Vives, Ludovico, 559, 566, 769
Voet, 684 ff, 810
INDEX OF NAMES
Waiters, 772
Waldensians* 237, 352, 354 ff, 359 ,
365* 6 99 , 725
Weber, Max, 319, 645 ff
Weigel, Valentine, 741, 759 ff.
Wesley, John, 722
Whitgift, 665
Wichem, 568
Williams, Roger, 672, 674
Winstanley, Gerard, 71 1, 712
Wirtz, 771
Wiirttemberg Temple, 725
Wyclif, 358 ff, 362, 363, 365, 367
Zinzendorf, 719 ff, 759, 788 ff.
Zwingli, 626, 669, 703
GEORGE ALLEN & UNWIN LTD
London: 40 Museum Street, W.C.i
Cape Town: 73 St. George’s Street
Sydney, N.S.W.: Wynyard Square
Auckland, N.Z.: 41 Albert Street
Toronto: 77 Wellington Street. West
Ethics
by NICOLAI HARTMANN
Professor of Philosophy, University of Berlin
translated by Stanton Coit, Ph.D. (Berlin)
Demy 8 vo. In Preparation
Professor Hartmann's Ethik was first published in Germany in 1926,
and was immediately recognized by leading thinkers as an original
contribution to the philosophy of moral experience. Its originality is
especially marked in two particular aspects. It is a rigorous interpreta-
tion of the data of ethics from the point of view of metaphysical
realism. It is also a systematic application of the methodology of
Professor Husserl and his school to the phenomena of conscience,
responsibility and guilt. Both the metaphysics and the method exhibit
the subject-matter of ethics in a new light, showing the inner structure
and objective self-existence of values as well as their dependence upon
the ontological categories.
The Social Substance of Religion
Demy 8 vo. by GERALD HEARD 10s. 6 d.
In this book Mr. Heard shows that mental conflict is the real cause of
social instability and upheaval, and that this has always been the case.
But the Freudian explanation of the conflict is unsatisfactory, that
of “Group Psychology'* being more accurate. The latter allows of an
interpretation of human history which not only explains the strength
and pertinacity of Religion, but points to a religious solution of the
present social conflict. Mr. Heard’s writing contains many suggestive
and original ideas which make this a work of unusual value.
A Study of the Philosophy of Malebranche
Demy 8 vo. by R. W. CHURCH, D.Phil. 125. 6 d.
An examination of the philosophical system of the great Oratorian.
His theories of the relation between reason and faith, of perception,
of judgment, and of knowledge are exhibited in their dependence on
the three main doctrines of his system : the vision of God, Occasionalism,
and the vision in God. These doctrines are studied in detail and in their
historical relations to La Forge, Cordemoy and Arnauld.
Myth, Nature, and Individual
Aspects of the Philosophy of Art and Magic
Cr. 8 uo. by FRANK ALISON BAKER 55.
These essays define the thesis to a comprehensive study of the status
and significance of Mythology. Myth is regarded as a valid and autono-
mous activity of the mind; its rdle is discussed in relation to Science,
to Art, and to Philosophy. In particular the essays are a vindication of
Mythology and a re-assertion of its rights in defiance of the strictures
of dogmatic rationalism.
The^Revelation of Deity
by J.’E. TURNER, M.A., Ph.D.
Author of “Personality and Reality,” “The Nature of Deity,” etc.
(Reader in Philosophy in the University of Liverpool)
Demy Bvo. $ s , td.
The author discusses the various ways whereby the Divine Nature can
manifest itself so as to be comprehended by the human mind.
"Dr. Turner has won the reputation of being one of the ablest apologists
for theism at present writing in England ." — Saturday Review
The Mystic Will
by HOWARD H. BRINTON, Ph.D,
Introduction by Rufus M. Jones, D.Litt.
La. Cr. Bvo. 8s. 6 d.
"An illuminating study of the philosophy of Jacob Boehme. ... It
would be difficult to over-praise the care and skill with which Dr.
Brinton has striven to unlock the secrets of his thought and to place
him in his true rank in the history of philosophy ." — Expository Times
Democracy and Religion
A Study in Quakerism
by G. VON SCHULZE GAEVERNITZ
Swarthmore Lecture, 1930
Cr. Bvo. 2nd Impression Cloth 2 s. 6 d., Paper is.6d.
The well-known German authority on social and economic questions
traces the descent of Democracy, not from the official Reformation, but
from the traditions of Plato, Christ, St. John, St. Francis, the Baptists,
Mennonites and Quakers, with Kant, Goethe and Hegel in the same
line of succession. He summarizes the main ideas in the world of sects
from which Democracy crystallized towards the end of the seventeenth
century. He then studies the historic mission of the Quakers, examines
Social Democracy as a Western ideal, and concludes with an exposition
of the mission of Quakers in the present day.
The Meaning of the Glorious Koran
An Explanatory Translation
Demy Bvo. by MARMADUKE PICKTHALL 18s.
It is fairly certain that no holy Scripture can be adequately rendered
by one who disbelieves its message. As this is the first translation
# of the Koran to be made by an Englishman who is also a Muslim, it
may claim to be the most authoritative interpretation, from the Muslim
poinf of view, which has yet been presented to English readers. Mr.
Pickthall has been a lifelong student of Al-Qur'dn, and he began the
present work over ten years ago. He later took the manuscript to
Egypt, where he revised it, word by word, with expert help. He
contributes an illuminating introduction summing up the salient
features of Muhammad's life, and adds some valuable notes to the text
of the Scriptures themselves.
Sin and the New Psychology
by CLIFFORD E. BARBOU&, Ph.D.
Cr. 8 vo. Introduction by H. R. Mackintosh, D.D. ^ 6 s.
"Compact and masterly pages. . . . Here is a writer who reads and
thinks ." — United Methodist
"Dr. Barbour is not only a sound psychologist, but a sane Christian
teacher also ." — Methodist Times
Creative Worship
by HOWARD H. BRINTON, Ph.D. '»
Swarthmore Lecture , 1931
Cr. Svo. Cloth 2 s. 6 d., Paper is. 6 d.
The author's purpose is to compare the mechanistic and organic trends
in religious worship and in particular to analyse and evaluate the contri-
bution of Quaker practice to what he calls organic worship. The Puritan
and Quaker types of worship are selected for comparison and to illustrate
the main theme. The subject of worship is approached from the biological
standpoint, and the experience of the Quakers is used to show the possi-
bility of something new and creative and unpredictable emerging in and
through the worship of a Group. "Quakerism," he states, "is the belief
that the highest type of worship is a group mysticism which affords
opportunity for the silent growth of organic relations uniting the wor-
shippers with God and with each other."
The Holy and the Living God
Demy 8vo. by M. D. R. WILLINK ios. 6 d.
Some years ago, Professor Otto’s book, The Idea of the Holy , brought
into prominence the awful and daunting side of our apprehension of
deity. The present writer has traced the idea in the Bible and Christian
history, and shows that it plays an essential part in the working of
spiritual forces, that it throws light on obscure passages of the Old
Testament, and that the present weakness of our religious life may be
partly due to our forgetfulness of this aspect of religious consciousness.
A Study of Conversion
by the Rev. L. W. LANG
Foreword by William Brown, M.D., B.Sc.
Demy 8vo. Ios . 6d.
This is a study of the process of Conversion and also of abnormal
variations, including mystical phenomena. The process conforms to a
spiritual law of assimilation, and the opinion that the Conversion-crisis
is a sudden disruptive event is shown to be erroneous. Many Christian
conversions of various degrees of intensity and duration are discussed,
of people belonging to different periods and sections of the Church,
such as Dr. Paton, George Fox, S. Teresa, Luigi Settembrjni, Andrew
Carnegie and others. This study treats Conversion from a new point of
view and is indispensable for those interested in Christian evangelism or
in the psychology of religion.
A 11 prices are net
LONDON: GEORGE ALLEN & UNWIN LJD
rrr?T 5TJ7TT?T?T g^qrmq
Ld Bahaaur Shastr/ National Acadmey of Administration Library
MUSSOORIE }0)SL*iK
qf qq? qrfqq q;T?fr 1 1
This book is to be returned on the date last stamped.
Date
^arTT^xT 1 }
qvf qJsJTT
Borrower's
No.
fearer
Date
qft qwr
Borrower's
No.
i
i
1
J
s ' i
1
i
i
j
!
i
!
i!
|
1
i
|
.
1
i
GL 280
TRO
ini 9*0
280
Tro
Class No
%-J-TT
r
sriF'ct qw
Acc No. 4-^06
*rmT
Book No.
Author Troeltsch** E_^
T* 0
Titlo
LIBRARY
LAL BAHADUR SHASTRI
National Academy of Administration
MUSSOORIE
Accession Na. _ [ Oj ^
1. Books are Issued for 15 days only but
may have to be recalled earlier If urgen-
tly required.
2. An over-due charge of 25 Paise per day
per volume will be charged.
3. Books may be renewed on request, at
the discretion of the Librarian.
4. Periodicals, Rare and Refrence books
may not be issued and may be con-
sulted only in the Library.
5. Books lost, defaced or Injured In any
way shall have to be replaced or its
double price shall be paid by the
borrower.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11